lewrockwell--2020-01-23--The Collegiate War Against Men

The Collegiate War Against Men

While many have commented on the eight year decline in college enrollments in the United States , no one , to my knowledge , has noted that most of that fall in the number attending college in the past four years is concentrated among men .
Between 2015 and 2019 , according to the National College Clearinghouse , the number of men on campuses declined by 691,643 , almost double the smaller fall among women , 348,955 .
In percentage terms , the male decline of 8.34 % was far more than double that among women , 3.18 % .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ America ’ s colleges .
In 2015 , there were 32 % more women than men , but now the differential is nearly 40 % .
For every five men , there are seven women .
The fundamental question is why —not only do far more women attend college than men , but why is the differential growing noticeably in the past few years ?
While several factors may be at work , I think at least part of the reason is a perception among males that colleges dislike them —or at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women .
There are several forms of discrimination against males that are increasingly turning men off to the collegiate experience .
They don ’ t like being second class citizens .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 Some forms of gender discrimination are seemingly rather mild and well intended .
For example , noting male domination of enrollment in some of the STEM disciplines such as engineering and mathematics , some schools have created Women in Science scholarships , research grants , or the like to encourage more women to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I do not see attempts to right the gender imbalance favoring females in most other disciplines , including some relatively high paying fields like nursing ( where roughly 90 % of graduates are female ) .
But the past decade has seen many examples of more blatant maltreatment of men on campus .
The U.S. Department of Education ’ s 2011 “ guidance ” in sexual assault cases led to colleges pursuing brutal , and in my judgment , un-American , Spanish Inquisition type actions in sexual assault cases .
Males accused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to cross-examination accusers , were denied effective use of legal counsel , often denied the right to present exculpatory evidence , and sometimes judged by the very persons prosecuting them .
KC Johnson ’ s book with Stuart Taylor , The Campus Rape Frenzy : The Attack on Due Process at America ’ s Universities , outlines scores of cases of injustices directed exclusively towards men .
And the number of judicial decisions favoring males poorly treated in college Kangaroo Courts has soared in recently years .

While many have commented on the eight year decline in college enrollments in the United States, no one, to my knowledge, has noted that most of that fall in the number attending college in the past four years is concentrated among men. Between 2015 and 2019, according to the National College Clearinghouse, the number of men on campuses declined by 691,643, almost double the smaller fall among women, 348,955. In percentage terms, the male decline of 8.34 % was far more than double that among women, 3.18%.
Women have for decades outnumbered men in America’s colleges. In 2015, there were 32% more women than men, but now the differential is nearly 40%. For every five men, there are seven women. The fundamental question is why —not only do far more women attend college than men, but why is the differential growing noticeably in the past few years?
While several factors may be at work, I think at least part of the reason is a perception among males that colleges dislike them —or at least do not like them as much as women. There are several forms of discrimination against males that are increasingly turning men off to the collegiate experience. They don’t like being second class citizens. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
Some forms of gender discrimination are seemingly rather mild and well intended. For example, noting male domination of enrollment in some of the STEM disciplines such as engineering and mathematics, some schools have created Women in Science scholarships, research grants, or the like to encourage more women to enter these fields. Curiously, though, I do not see attempts to right the gender imbalance favoring females in most other disciplines, including some relatively high paying fields like nursing (where roughly 90 % of graduates are female).
But the past decade has seen many examples of more blatant maltreatment of men on campus. The U.S. Department of Education’s 2011 “guidance” in sexual assault cases led to colleges pursuing brutal, and in my judgment, un-American, Spanish Inquisition type actions in sexual assault cases. Males accused of sexual assault were often denied opportunities to cross-examination accusers, were denied effective use of legal counsel, often denied the right to present exculpatory evidence, and sometimes judged by the very persons prosecuting them. KC Johnson’s book with Stuart Taylor, The Campus Rape Frenzy: The Attack on Due Process at America’s Universities, outlines scores of cases of injustices directed exclusively towards men. And the number of judicial decisions favoring males poorly treated in college Kangaroo Courts has soared in recently years.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-01-23--New Bill To Allow Cops To Detain Citizens, Force Them To Explain Who They Are, What They’re Doing

Kentucky — An ominous bill that is currently making its way through the Kentucky Senate aims to give police unprecedented unconstitutional powers .
These new powers will allow cops to stop anyone they want and demand that person tell them who they are , where they are going , and explain their actions .
Naturally , it has civil rights advocates up in arms , but it doesn ’ t seem to be slowing down the bill ’ s momentum .
Police merely need to make an unsubstantiated claim that a person is involved in criminal activity which gives them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand his name , home address and age — as well as ask to see his driver ’ s license , if he has one — and tell him to explain what he is presently doing “ to the satisfaction of the officer.
” If you invoke your constitutional right not to answer the officer ’ s questions , this new bill grants cops the right to detain you for two hours .
Even more ominous is the fact that this detainment is not considered an arrest so you have no right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even have to record it .
This non-arrest grey area detention will undoubtedly be rife for abuse .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 Nevertheless , advocates for the police state tyranny say cops must have this new ability—to keep us safe .
As Kentucky.com reports , Sen. Stephen Meredith , R-Leitchfield , said Grayson County law enforcement officials asked him for the bill after a number of local incidents showed the need for it .
“ If a man acts suspicious , then why wouldn ’ t you want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Meredith said in an interview .
“ I can ’ t imagine any legitimate reason in the world why a person would refuse to give their name and photo identification to a police officer if they were asked.
” In other words , if you have nothing to hide , you have nothing to fear…or , in other words , submit to the police state .
Wrong !
Well Sen. Meredith , we ’ d like to educate you in why a person would refuse to talk to police—because it is our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is straight out of the playbook of every tyranny in history .
Remember “ Ihre Papiere , Bitte ” ?
That phrase often brought shudders to the people who heard it in the 1930s and ’ 40s .
It is German for “ Your papers , please , ” and this bill is nearly identical to that sinister Nazi policy .

Kentucky — An ominous bill that is currently making its way through the Kentucky Senate aims to give police unprecedented unconstitutional powers. These new powers will allow cops to stop anyone they want and demand that person tell them who they are, where they are going, and explain their actions. Naturally, it has civil rights advocates up in arms, but it doesn’t seem to be slowing down the bill’s momentum.
Police merely need to make an unsubstantiated claim that a person is involved in criminal activity which gives them free reign to stop that person, demand his name, home address and age — as well as ask to see his driver’s license, if he has one — and tell him to explain what he is presently doing “to the satisfaction of the officer.”
If you invoke your constitutional right not to answer the officer’s questions, this new bill grants cops the right to detain you for two hours. Even more ominous is the fact that this detainment is not considered an arrest so you have no right to an attorney and police don’t even have to record it. This non-arrest grey area detention will undoubtedly be rife for abuse. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
Nevertheless, advocates for the police state tyranny say cops must have this new ability—to keep us safe. As Kentucky.com reports, Sen. Stephen Meredith, R-Leitchfield, said Grayson County law enforcement officials asked him for the bill after a number of local incidents showed the need for it.
“If a man acts suspicious, then why wouldn’t you want to know what his name is?” Meredith said in an interview. “I can’t imagine any legitimate reason in the world why a person would refuse to give their name and photo identification to a police officer if they were asked.”
In other words, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear…or, in other words, submit to the police state. Wrong!
Well Sen. Meredith, we’d like to educate you in why a person would refuse to talk to police—because it is our right not to! Legislation like this is straight out of the playbook of every tyranny in history. Remember “Ihre Papiere, Bitte”?
That phrase often brought shudders to the people who heard it in the 1930s and ’40s. It is German for “Your papers, please,” and this bill is nearly identical to that sinister Nazi policy.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-01-23--Wuhan Coronavirus Hits the US: What Preppers Need To Know

( Jan. 22 , 2020 ) The CDC has confirmed the first case of 2019 novel Coronavirus ( 2019-nCoV ) in the US .
The patient is a man in his 30s who had recently traveled through the Wuhan region in China to Snohomish County , Washington State , north of Seattle .
And , according to the CDC , this won ’ t be the last case .
Coronaviruses can produce severe , sometimes fatal respiratory illness .
The 2019-nCoV appears to be a fast-moving , highly contagious virus .
So far , there are 6 confirmed deaths out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a developing threat , and one that we need to keep an eye on .
I expect information regarding this virus to change and be updated frequently on sites such as the CDC , WHO , and CIDRAP .
Here is what we know right now .
A coronavirus is a relatively common type of virus among mammals .
In spite of how common they are , relatively few of them make humans ill .
When they do make us sick , however , it can be serious .
Deadly serious .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ its appearance .
The virus is covered in spikes , giving it a crown-like appearance .
The spikes look like a halo or corona .
Both SARS and MERS are coronaviruses that have proven fatal .
There ’ s an ongoing outbreak of MERS ( Middle East Respiratory Syndrome ) in Saudi Arabia which has killed 858 people globally since 2012 .
Prepping for a Pandemi ... Cat Ellis Best Price : $ 12.50 Buy New $ 57.65 Coronaviruses are enveloped RNA viruses .
Because they are enveloped , they have greater protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DNA viruses .
So , what we have here is a virus that is well-protected from our immune system and that has a greater likelihood of mutation .
Both of these pose challenges to developing treatments .
How does a coronavirus make you sick ?
Coronaviruses produce respiratory symptoms like a cold or flu .
Symptoms include coughing , fever , congestion , headaches , body aches , and a sore throat .
Coronaviruses can , however , develop into viral pneumonia .
For people in at-risk populations , such as the very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also have a pre-existing condition , such as diabetes or heart disease , the risk of dying from pneumonia is very real .
The Wuhan Coronavirus , officially known as 2019-nCoV , is a coronavirus first identified from a patient in Wuhan , China .
The novel ( new ) coronavirus was first noted in mid-December .
The illness has been linked to a market .
According to Cidrap : Since coronaviruses are spread by mammals , it is unlikely that the family because infected from their own seafood stand .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ live animals from a nearby vendor .
How is the Wuhan Coronavirus spread ?
The big threat is person-to-person transmission .
Early reports stated it was transmitted animal-to-person .
But it wasn ’ t long before the worst was confirmed .
The transmission of coronavirus is similar to influenza .
It is transmitted via the water droplets spread in the air when someone coughs , sneezes , or breathes .
It is possible that it is transmitted by coming in contact with other infected bodily fluids .
MERS , for example , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through contact with infected camel urine and milk .
How deadly is the Wuhan Coronavirus ?
For some people , like the man in Washington State , the Wuhan coronavirus won ’ t result in anything more than a bad cold .
For others , it has been fatal .
At this point , there are 6 confirmed deaths out of 300 or so confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV .
That works out to be a 2 % mortality rate .
Compared to MERS which has slightly over 30 % mortality rate in patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appear to be a deadly threat .
One of the victims of 2019-nCoV was an 89-year old man with diabetes and a heart condition .
I have not been able to track down information on the other 5 people who died .
It would be logical , however , that these victims were also in a weaker condition before they became infected .
But , at this point , I want to be careful with assumptions .
However , just because it currently has a 2 % mortality rate doesn ’ t mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When MERS first emerged , it had a mortality rate of about 60 % .
It popped up in a limited population , mostly camel herders .
Within this group , those with diabetes had an almost 90 % mortality rate .
However , when it began to spread to the population at large , it dropped to just above 30 % .
SARS , another coronavirus that originated in China , had a 15 % mortality rate in the general population .
Among elderly patients , that jumped to around 50 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other 5 people who died ( and future fatalities ) , and until we have seen this disease spread to more people in more areas , we just don ’ t know if that 2 % number is going to go up , down , or stay the same .
What we do know is that mutation is always a risk with coronaviruses .
The more people who become infected , the greater the chance for a mutation and a higher mortality rate .
There will be more Cases of Wuhan Coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there will be plenty more cases of 2019-nCoV .
Not only is the CDC anticipating more cases , but the WHO is also concerned about sustained transmission .
In other words , they expect this to last a while .
National Geographic points out the uncertainty in how deadly , or not , this coronavirus could be : Where has the Wuhan Coronavirus spread ?
2019-nCoV is our latest pandemic .
To be clear , pandemic doesn ’ t mean “ extra-deadly ” .
It means that a disease has crossed a border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Wuhan Coronavirus has already crossed multiple borders thanks to air travel , plus it is spreading further within China .
Currently , 2019-nCoV has been confirmed in China , Taiwan , Thailand , South Korea , Japan , the US and possibly Australia ( still waiting on test results to confirm the Australian patient ’ s illness ) .
What is the US government doing in response ?
There isn ’ t much they can do at the moment .
One thing they can do is screen passengers from Wuhan as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be surprised to see this expanded to all flights coming in from China as this develops .
The CDC doesn ’ t have much else to offer , other than to suggest handwashing , which is a good if insufficient , suggestion .
This will spread much further Two things that lead me to believe that the Wuhan coronavirus will spread much further than it already has are : • The numbers of total infected are likely much higher than China is reporting .
• Millions of Chinese people are about to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is China accurately reporting the number of infections ?
When MERS initially broke out in Saudi Arabia , the reported numbers were artificially low .
The Saudi government was terribly slow in reporting accurate numbers .
Whether this is intentional or not , it appears that China is also downplaying the total number of people infected .
This is a common practice in order to prevent public panic .
According to the Imperial College London : The estimate of total infected ranged from 996 up to 2,298 on January 12 .
Also , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emerged at an interesting time .
The Chinese people will be celebrating their lunar New Year this Saturday , January 25th .
Over the course of their celebrations , Chinese travelers are expected to make over an estimated 3 billion trips .
That ’ s a whole lot of opportunity to spread a highly contagious disease throughout a dense population .
Think of all the chances 2019-nCoV will have to mutate as it infects more and more people .
These two factors will give the Wuhan coronavirus every opportunity to spread and mutate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases , and we ’ ll see if that very low mortality rate of 2 % holds or not .
What can you do ?
Here are some things you can do to be proactive without panicking .
Take all the same precautions as you would for a cold or flu .
• Avoid crowds ( malls , stadiums , airports , etc ) and closed population ( prisons , dormitories , nursing homes , any place with re-circled air ) .
• Wash your hands for at least 20 seconds with soap @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do what you can to improve it , if possible .
Get ready for an extended bug-in .
If this disease continues to spread and become more deadly as it is transmitted around the globe , you may wish to do a Self-Imposed Reverse Quarantine ( SIRQ ) .
This is where you voluntarily separate yourself from others until you know its safe outside your borders .
I have included detailed instructions on how to implement a SIRQ during a pandemic in my book , Prepping for a Pandemic .
In it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to coronaviruses and preparing for all sorts of pandemics .
You can find an article about pandemic preparedness here .
You can find an article about how pandemics spread here .
Keep in mind that pandemics can last for a long time .
You ’ ll want to start improving your food storage , water supplies , and any medical supplies and medications you may need for an extended period .
Improve your health and first aid skills .
During the Ebola crisis of 2014 , many people died waiting at clinics for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak .
There just weren ’ t enough health care workers , beds , or supplies to go around .
People were dying from heart attacks and complications to labor simply because personnel and supplies were stretched too thin .
Besides , during an outbreak , do you really want to go to where all the really sick people are for something like pinkeye or a stomach bug ?
Prepperu2019s Natural ... Cat Ellis Best Price : $ 7.68 Buy New $ 9.34 Get out of the city if you can .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ densely populated areas .
Disease spreads fast in cities and high population centers .
If you can get out of dodge , all the better for you and your loved ones .
Another book that does a good job of addressing pandemic preparedness , but from a fiction POV , is The Jakarta Pandemic , by Steven Konkoly .
If you can ’ t get out of the city or out of the burbs , be prepared for neighbors who did not prep for this to turn on you if they think you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prepping for a Pandemic , but during the Ebola outbreak back in 2014 , people were breaking curfew and defying martial law because they were sitting in their homes with no food .
Do you think we would allocate supplies more efficiently ?
Ask anyone who has had to rely on FEMA during a disaster if they would rely on the government to feed you during an emergency .
And look at that warehouse of two-year-old emergency supplies that were stashed away and not distributed in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria , leaving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a scary thing we don ’ t like to look at .
It ’ s not an enemy we can shoot .
We are overdue for another Great Pandemic , similar to Influenza in 1918 .
We don ’ t know when and we don ’ t know where .
But , history has proven that pandemics can and will continue to happen .
The best thing you can do is stay informed , mind your overall health to lower your risk of serious complications , and avoid being around other people whenever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ updated as this outbreak develops .
Questions or concerns ?
Drop me a line in the comment section .
Reprinted with permission from The Organic Prepper .

(Jan. 22, 2020) The CDC has confirmed the first case of 2019 novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in the US. The patient is a man in his 30s who had recently traveled through the Wuhan region in China to Snohomish County, Washington State, north of Seattle.
And, according to the CDC, this won’t be the last case.
Coronaviruses can produce severe, sometimes fatal respiratory illness. The 2019-nCoV appears to be a fast-moving, highly contagious virus. So far, there are 6 confirmed deaths out of approximately 300 confirmed cases.
This is a developing threat, and one that we need to keep an eye on. I expect information regarding this virus to change and be updated frequently on sites such as the CDC, WHO, and CIDRAP.
Here is what we know right now.
What Is a coronavirus?
A coronavirus is a relatively common type of virus among mammals. In spite of how common they are, relatively few of them make humans ill. When they do make us sick, however, it can be serious. Deadly serious.
The term “coronavirus” comes from its appearance. The virus is covered in spikes, giving it a crown-like appearance. The spikes look like a halo or corona. Both SARS and MERS are coronaviruses that have proven fatal. There’s an ongoing outbreak of MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) in Saudi Arabia which has killed 858 people globally since 2012. Prepping for a Pandemi... Ellis, Cat Best Price: $25.48 Buy New $15.95 (as of 03:10 UTC - Details)
Coronaviruses are enveloped RNA viruses. Because they are enveloped, they have greater protection. RNA viruses mutate more frequently than DNA viruses. So, what we have here is a virus that is well-protected from our immune system and that has a greater likelihood of mutation. Both of these pose challenges to developing treatments.
How does a coronavirus make you sick?
Coronaviruses produce respiratory symptoms like a cold or flu. Symptoms include coughing, fever, congestion, headaches, body aches, and a sore throat. Coronaviruses can, however, develop into viral pneumonia.
For people in at-risk populations, such as the very young or very old, or who also have a pre-existing condition, such as diabetes or heart disease, the risk of dying from pneumonia is very real.
What is 2019-nCoV?
The Wuhan Coronavirus, officially known as 2019-nCoV, is a coronavirus first identified from a patient in Wuhan, China. The novel (new) coronavirus was first noted in mid-December. The illness has been linked to a market. According to Cidrap:
Today, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported that Wuhan authorities told visiting Hong Kong health officials that three members of the same household were among the 41 cases. They include a father, his son, and a cousin who ran a seafood stall at the market at the center of the investigation and got sick at the same time, suggesting that they may have been exposed to the same source. The market also sold live animals such as poultry, bats, and marmots, along with wildlife parts.
Since coronaviruses are spread by mammals, it is unlikely that the family because infected from their own seafood stand. It is more likely that they were infected by live animals from a nearby vendor.
How is the Wuhan Coronavirus spread?
The big threat is person-to-person transmission. Early reports stated it was transmitted animal-to-person. But it wasn’t long before the worst was confirmed.
The wife of the man who owned the seafood stand got sick. She hadn’t been to the market and could only have caught it from her husband. Soon, more person-to-person cases began popping up, including healthcare workers caring for infected patients.
The transmission of coronavirus is similar to influenza. It is transmitted via the water droplets spread in the air when someone coughs, sneezes, or breathes. It is possible that it is transmitted by coming in contact with other infected bodily fluids. MERS, for example, is transmitted not only person-to-person but also camel-to-human through contact with infected camel urine and milk.
How deadly is the Wuhan Coronavirus?
For some people, like the man in Washington State, the Wuhan coronavirus won’t result in anything more than a bad cold. For others, it has been fatal.
At this point, there are 6 confirmed deaths out of 300 or so confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV. That works out to be a 2% mortality rate. Compared to MERS which has slightly over 30% mortality rate in patients without pre-existing conditions, this does not appear to be a deadly threat.
One of the victims of 2019-nCoV was an 89-year old man with diabetes and a heart condition. I have not been able to track down information on the other 5 people who died. It would be logical, however, that these victims were also in a weaker condition before they became infected. But, at this point, I want to be careful with assumptions.
However, just because it currently has a 2% mortality rate doesn’t mean that number won’t change. When MERS first emerged, it had a mortality rate of about 60%. It popped up in a limited population, mostly camel herders. Within this group, those with diabetes had an almost 90% mortality rate. However, when it began to spread to the population at large, it dropped to just above 30%.
SARS, another coronavirus that originated in China, had a 15% mortality rate in the general population. Among elderly patients, that jumped to around 50%.
Until we see more information about the other 5 people who died (and future fatalities), and until we have seen this disease spread to more people in more areas, we just don’t know if that 2% number is going to go up, down, or stay the same. What we do know is that mutation is always a risk with coronaviruses. The more people who become infected, the greater the chance for a mutation and a higher mortality rate.
There will be more Cases of Wuhan Coronavirus
What is a near certainty is that there will be plenty more cases of 2019-nCoV. Not only is the CDC anticipating more cases, but the WHO is also concerned about sustained transmission. In other words, they expect this to last a while.
In major developments surrounding the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak centered in China, the World Health Organization (WHO) said it sees possible evidence of sustained transmission—meaning the virus is spreading beyond just clusters of patients. In addition, China today reported another spike in cases—to more than 300—plus two more deaths, with more newly affected provinces, while Taiwan reported its first 2019-nCoV case in a traveler from Wuhan.
National Geographic points out the uncertainty in how deadly, or not, this coronavirus could be:
“It’s unclear whether or not this [Wuhan] virus is simply going to die out or whether it’s going to evolve into something that’s more pathogenic,” Lipkin says. “We don’t have any evidence yet of superspreaders, and hopefully we never will. But we also don’t know how long this new coronavirus lasts on surfaces, or how long people will continue to shed virus after being infected.”
Where has the Wuhan Coronavirus spread?
2019-nCoV is our latest pandemic. To be clear, pandemic doesn’t mean “extra-deadly”. It means that a disease has crossed a border or is impacted a significantly large landmass. Wuhan Coronavirus has already crossed multiple borders thanks to air travel, plus it is spreading further within China.
Currently, 2019-nCoV has been confirmed in China, Taiwan, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, the US and possibly Australia (still waiting on test results to confirm the Australian patient’s illness).
What is the US government doing in response?
There isn’t much they can do at the moment. One thing they can do is screen passengers from Wuhan as they fly to the US.
Nancy Messonnier, MD, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said that, on Jan 19 as the nCoV situation was evolving in China and in the Asian region, federal officials decided to expand traveler health checks in people arriving from Wuhan at two more US airports: Atlanta and Chicago. Also, health officials will funnel all Wuhan air travelers into the five US airports doing enhanced screening, which also includes JFK Airport in New York and international airports in San Francisco and Los Angeles. US officials used a similar strategy to screen people arriving from West Africa during the 2014 Ebola outbreak. The funneling process is complex, requiring air passengers to be rerouted and reticketed.
I would not be surprised to see this expanded to all flights coming in from China as this develops.
The CDC doesn’t have much else to offer, other than to suggest handwashing, which is a good if insufficient, suggestion.
This will spread much further
Two things that lead me to believe that the Wuhan coronavirus will spread much further than it already has are:
The numbers of total infected are likely much higher than China is reporting. Millions of Chinese people are about to travel to celebrate the Chinese New Year
Is China accurately reporting the number of infections?
When MERS initially broke out in Saudi Arabia, the reported numbers were artificially low. The Saudi government was terribly slow in reporting accurate numbers. Whether this is intentional or not, it appears that China is also downplaying the total number of people infected. This is a common practice in order to prevent public panic.
According to the Imperial College London:
…the number of people to be infected as of January 12 (per the study) is likely more in the region of 1,723 — a figure around 35 times greater than the 45 cases confirmed in a lab.
The estimate of total infected ranged from 996 up to 2,298 on January 12. Also, from the article:
Here is the academics’ conclusion: “It is likely that the Wuhan outbreak of a novel coronavirus has caused substantially more cases of moderate or severe respiratory illness than currently reported.”
Chinese New Year
This virus has emerged at an interesting time. The Chinese people will be celebrating their lunar New Year this Saturday, January 25th. Over the course of their celebrations, Chinese travelers are expected to make over an estimated 3 billion trips.
3 billion trips.
That’s a whole lot of opportunity to spread a highly contagious disease throughout a dense population. Think of all the chances 2019-nCoV will have to mutate as it infects more and more people.
These two factors will give the Wuhan coronavirus every opportunity to spread and mutate. We will have plenty of new cases, and we’ll see if that very low mortality rate of 2% holds or not.
What can you do?
Here are some things you can do to be proactive without panicking.
Take all the same precautions as you would for a cold or flu.
Get plenty of rest.
Eat a healthy diet.
Avoid excess sugar and alcohol.
Avoid crowds (malls, stadiums, airports, etc) and closed population (prisons, dormitories, nursing homes, any place with re-circled air).
Wash your hands for at least 20 seconds with soap
Avoid touching your face.
If you have a pre-existing condition, do what you can to improve it, if possible.
These may include:
Diabetes
Hypertension
Kidney Disease
Heart Disease
Obesity
Cancer and impaired immune response
Get ready for an extended bug-in.
If this disease continues to spread and become more deadly as it is transmitted around the globe, you may wish to do a Self-Imposed Reverse Quarantine (SIRQ). This is where you voluntarily separate yourself from others until you know its safe outside your borders.
I have included detailed instructions on how to implement a SIRQ during a pandemic in my book, Prepping for a Pandemic. In it, you will find even more information specific to coronaviruses and preparing for all sorts of pandemics.
You can find an article about pandemic preparedness here.
You can find an article about how pandemics spread here.
Keep in mind that pandemics can last for a long time. You’ll want to start improving your food storage, water supplies, and any medical supplies and medications you may need for an extended period.
Improve your health and first aid skills.
During the Ebola crisis of 2014, many people died waiting at clinics for health care not related to the Ebola outbreak. There just weren’t enough health care workers, beds, or supplies to go around. People were dying from heart attacks and complications to labor simply because personnel and supplies were stretched too thin. Besides, during an outbreak, do you really want to go to where all the really sick people are for something like pinkeye or a stomach bug? Prepperu2019s Natural ... Cat Ellis Best Price: $7.68 Buy New $9.34 (as of 06:00 UTC - Details)
Get out of the city if you can.
You would be best served getting out of densely populated areas. Disease spreads fast in cities and high population centers. If you can get out of dodge, all the better for you and your loved ones. Another book that does a good job of addressing pandemic preparedness, but from a fiction POV, is The Jakarta Pandemic, by Steven Konkoly.
If you can’t get out of the city or out of the burbs, be prepared for neighbors who did not prep for this to turn on you if they think you have supplies. I cover this in Prepping for a Pandemic, but during the Ebola outbreak back in 2014, people were breaking curfew and defying martial law because they were sitting in their homes with no food. Do you think we would allocate supplies more efficiently? Ask anyone who has had to rely on FEMA during a disaster if they would rely on the government to feed you during an emergency. And look at that warehouse of two-year-old emergency supplies that were stashed away and not distributed in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria, leaving people to suffer needlessly.
In Summary
Disease is a scary thing we don’t like to look at. It’s not an enemy we can shoot. We are overdue for another Great Pandemic, similar to Influenza in 1918. We don’t know when and we don’t know where. But, history has proven that pandemics can and will continue to happen.
The best thing you can do is stay informed, mind your overall health to lower your risk of serious complications, and avoid being around other people whenever possible.
We’ll keep you updated as this outbreak develops. Questions or concerns? Drop me a line in the comment section.
Reprinted with permission from The Organic Prepper.


lewrockwell--2020-01-23--NJ Vaccine Bill To End Religious Exemptions Collapses: Is the Tide Turning?

The battleground is now set .
On one side are those who continue to claim “ the science is settled ” on vaccine safety and want to eliminate all vaccine exemptions , essentially forcing all children to get vaccines whether their parents agree or not .
On the other side are those who believe that the science is far from settled , and believe that parents should have the right to choose what gets injected into their children ’ s bodies without fear of punishment .
The latest skirmish of this battle was on Monday in Trenton , NJ , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation ’ s broadest bans on religious exemptions to childhood vaccines did not have enough support in the Democrat-controlled State Senate to be put up for a vote .
The bill would have ended a policy that allows parents in New Jersey to cite religious beliefs as the reason their children have not been immunized , without affecting the child ’ s ability to be enrolled in school .
Weeks of sustained and boisterous protests outside the State Legislature by those opposed to forced vaccination are being touted as the main reason the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intensity of the prolonged protest was unlike anything in Trenton in over a decade , many longtime lawmakers and lobbyists said .
Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 The protesters took it to be a monumental victory for their cause , and some advocates are seeing this as a tipping point in the battle , going into 2020 with great optimism .
Vaccine safety advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. got clamorous cheers as he spoke to the protesters about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to him : They are not working for you , they are not working for me , and they are definitely not working for our children .
And you being here today is the way that we finish that .
That we make sure that they start working for us .
You guys are heroes !
Because this state is known as the medicine cabinet state , this is the headquarters of all those [ pharmaceutical ] companies , they own these people in the state legislature .
And guess what ?
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in December , when they first came out , and now they ’ re coming back and they ’ re trying to do it again .
And we ’ re going to beat them this week too !
( source ) Mainstream media had a predictably different tone on the matter , In a New York Times article on the subject , the familiar vaccine safety mantras are cited in authoritative parlance from legislators : The article also notes that ‘ States that have limited or revoked religion-based vaccination exemptions include California , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which was at the epicenter of a measles outbreak last year.
’ The notion that a potential measles outbreak is ‘ a real public health emergency ’ is starting to wear thin on an awakening public .
The only lasting effect of the measles outbreak cited above in New York is that those that were infected now have true lifetime immunity from the measles .
The outbreak did not cause a single death .
But this shouldn ’ t be a surprise , since according to the CDC , there were no deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole decade studied ( 2004 to 2015 ) , and none have been reported since then either .
During that same ten-year period , the government ’ s own Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System ( VAERS ) reported 108 deaths from measles vaccines ( source ) .
And remember , this only represents children whose parents challenged other diagnoses such as SIDS and SUD and were successful in convincing the VAERS court of the culpability of the vaccine .
This is likely a very small fraction of actual cases .
I think Assemblyman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategy perfectly when he said that proponents of mandatory vaccination need to say repeatedly that vaccines are safe ; the reason is because if they instead directed the public to the statistical evidence , that evidence may prove the opposite .
The Global Vaccine Safety Summit organized by the World Health Organization ( WHO ) in early December , covered in-depth in this recent CE article , revealed that public confidence about the safety of vaccines is declining .
Activism challenging the safety and proper testing of vaccines , like the New Jersey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having an impact on this .
But not only has the public started to question vaccines in larger numbers , public health officials are losing confidence as well .
Professor Heidi Larson , Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project , sums up the dire situation at the summit as follows : If you watch the video of the meeting that has been made public on the WHO website , you might be struck by the nature of the concerns of speaker after speaker .
While this is supposed to be a vaccine safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voiced a straightforward concern for the safety of vaccines with regards to the health and safety of the world ’ s children .
One might think that if this was really about safety , that the death of one child from vaccination should be enough for the government , in collaboration with the manufacturers , to suspend the particular vaccine in question until testing could be done to certify the safety of that vaccine to everyone ’ s satisfaction .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 Instead , all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the WHO and its affiliates can do to ward off vaccine hesitancy and enforce vaccine compliance .
In the face of rising evidence of the damage linked to vaccines , the mandate of the people in attendance does not include actually questioning whether a child should get a particular vaccine or whether current vaccine scheduling is unsafe .
We get a clue as to why this is the case in examining who actually gets invited to have a seat at this summit : Note the phrase ‘ vaccine safety stakeholders.
’ In other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ STAKE ( financial , professional ) in the safety of vaccines , or more precisely , they have a stake in the perception that vaccines are safe , so that the pharmaceutical business can keep galloping along .
Those who would try to look at the evidence of vaccine safety objectively and suggest significant changes in the vaccine schedule would have long been vetted out and would never have been invited to the meeting .
And certainly no parents of vaccine-injured children , those who have first-hand knowledge about vaccine safety concerns , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this summit .
That doesn ’ t mean their voices are not being heard .
In a recent episode of Del Bigtree ’ s Highwire below , where I first saw footage of the vaccine safety summit , Del does a rather masterful job of parsing through some of the statements made at the meeting and giving us a greater context that certainly gives rise to the feeling that the tide in this battle is turning : Conscious , non-violent activism , where people stand up together and say that they don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by our authority , is an important catalyst of our collective awakening .
In the bigger picture we can understand how even the most maligned authority figures on the planet are people , just like us , and even if their actions are unacceptable , such actions are compelling us to take on the arduous process of challenging and even stepping away from authority altogether as we slowly gain a greater sense of our innate sovereignty .

The battleground is now set. On one side are those who continue to claim “the science is settled” on vaccine safety and want to eliminate all vaccine exemptions, essentially forcing all children to get vaccines whether their parents agree or not. On the other side are those who believe that the science is far from settled, and believe that parents should have the right to choose what gets injected into their children’s bodies without fear of punishment.
The latest skirmish of this battle was on Monday in Trenton, NJ, where a bill proposing one of the nation’s broadest bans on religious exemptions to childhood vaccines did not have enough support in the Democrat-controlled State Senate to be put up for a vote. The bill would have ended a policy that allows parents in New Jersey to cite religious beliefs as the reason their children have not been immunized, without affecting the child’s ability to be enrolled in school.
Weeks of sustained and boisterous protests outside the State Legislature by those opposed to forced vaccination are being touted as the main reason the bill did not go through. The intensity of the prolonged protest was unlike anything in Trenton in over a decade, many longtime lawmakers and lobbyists said. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
The protesters took it to be a monumental victory for their cause, and some advocates are seeing this as a tipping point in the battle, going into 2020 with great optimism. Vaccine safety advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. got clamorous cheers as he spoke to the protesters about the legislators pushing this bill. According to him:
They are not working for you, they are not working for me, and they are definitely not working for our children. And you being here today is the way that we finish that. That we make sure that they start working for us. You guys are heroes! Because this state is known as the medicine cabinet state, this is the headquarters of all those [pharmaceutical] companies, they own these people in the state legislature. And guess what? You beat them here! You beat them in December, when they first came out, and now they’re coming back and they’re trying to do it again. And we’re going to beat them this week too! (source)
Mainstream: “The Science Is Settled”
Mainstream media had a predictably different tone on the matter, In a New York Times article on the subject, the familiar vaccine safety mantras are cited in authoritative parlance from legislators:
“It’s going to get done…They can bang on their drums and their sirens and their truck horns…This is a real public health emergency.”–Senate president Stephen M. Sweeney “The science is settled on this,”–Senator Loretta Weinberg, a sponsor of the legislation “Vaccines are safe, and we in public health need to say that repeatedly.”–Assemblyman Dr. Herb Conaway
The article also notes that ‘States that have limited or revoked religion-based vaccination exemptions include California, Mississippi, Maine and New York, which was at the epicenter of a measles outbreak last year.’
The notion that a potential measles outbreak is ‘a real public health emergency’ is starting to wear thin on an awakening public. The only lasting effect of the measles outbreak cited above in New York is that those that were infected now have true lifetime immunity from the measles. The outbreak did not cause a single death. But this shouldn’t be a surprise, since according to the CDC, there were no deaths from measles in the U.S. over a whole decade studied (2004 to 2015), and none have been reported since then either. During that same ten-year period, the government’s own Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reported 108 deaths from measles vaccines (source). And remember, this only represents children whose parents challenged other diagnoses such as SIDS and SUD and were successful in convincing the VAERS court of the culpability of the vaccine. This is likely a very small fraction of actual cases.
I think Assemblyman Dr. Herb Conaway summed up lawmakers’ strategy perfectly when he said that proponents of mandatory vaccination need to say repeatedly that vaccines are safe; the reason is because if they instead directed the public to the statistical evidence, that evidence may prove the opposite.
WHO Miffed By Waning Vaccine Confidence
The Global Vaccine Safety Summit organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) in early December, covered in-depth in this recent CE article, revealed that public confidence about the safety of vaccines is declining. Activism challenging the safety and proper testing of vaccines, like the New Jersey protests described above, seems to be having an impact on this. But not only has the public started to question vaccines in larger numbers, public health officials are losing confidence as well. Professor Heidi Larson, Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, sums up the dire situation at the summit as follows:
The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen–and we’re constantly looking on any studies in this space–still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider. And if we lose that, we’re in trouble.
If you watch the video of the meeting that has been made public on the WHO website, you might be struck by the nature of the concerns of speaker after speaker. While this is supposed to be a vaccine safety summit, virtually none of the speakers voiced a straightforward concern for the safety of vaccines with regards to the health and safety of the world’s children. One might think that if this was really about safety, that the death of one child from vaccination should be enough for the government, in collaboration with the manufacturers, to suspend the particular vaccine in question until testing could be done to certify the safety of that vaccine to everyone’s satisfaction.
Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details) Instead, all the concerns at the summit revolved around what the WHO and its affiliates can do to ward off vaccine hesitancy and enforce vaccine compliance. In the face of rising evidence of the damage linked to vaccines, the mandate of the people in attendance does not include actually questioning whether a child should get a particular vaccine or whether current vaccine scheduling is unsafe. We get a clue as to why this is the case in examining who actually gets invited to have a seat at this summit:
Global Vaccine Safety Summit is meant for vaccine safety stakeholders from around the world, including current and former members of the Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety, immunisation programme managers, national regulatory authorities, pharmacovigilance staff from all WHO regions, and representatives of UN agencies, academic institutions, umbrella organizations of pharmaceutical companies, technical partners, industry representatives and funding agencies. (source)
Note the phrase ‘vaccine safety stakeholders.’ In other words, these people all have a STAKE (financial, professional) in the safety of vaccines, or more precisely, they have a stake in the perception that vaccines are safe, so that the pharmaceutical business can keep galloping along. Those who would try to look at the evidence of vaccine safety objectively and suggest significant changes in the vaccine schedule would have long been vetted out and would never have been invited to the meeting.
And certainly no parents of vaccine-injured children, those who have first-hand knowledge about vaccine safety concerns, would ever be given a voice at this summit. That doesn’t mean their voices are not being heard. In a recent episode of Del Bigtree’s Highwire below, where I first saw footage of the vaccine safety summit, Del does a rather masterful job of parsing through some of the statements made at the meeting and giving us a greater context that certainly gives rise to the feeling that the tide in this battle is turning:

The Takeaway
Conscious, non-violent activism, where people stand up together and say that they don’t consent to something being brought forth by our authority, is an important catalyst of our collective awakening. In the bigger picture we can understand how even the most maligned authority figures on the planet are people, just like us, and even if their actions are unacceptable, such actions are compelling us to take on the arduous process of challenging and even stepping away from authority altogether as we slowly gain a greater sense of our innate sovereignty.
Reprinted with permission from Collective Evolution.


lewrockwell--2020-01-23--Everything You Know About Europe Is Wrong

The apocryphal newspaper headline — “ fog in the channel , continent isolated ” — famously said something about the British mindset .
It ’ s hardly surprising that we are insular — we are literally an island after all — but this insularity is something that curiously crosses all barriers in British social and political life , whether of Left or Right , middle or working class , and on almost every issue .
This is true even for British liberals who , reeling since the night of 23 June , 2016 , have made the continent a sort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become alienated from their countrymen .
Right-thinking Britons see their country as an embarrassment sliding towards populism , a sad contrast to the moral superpower that is Germany and France under centrist leader Emmanuel Macron .
Yet the Continent of the Anglo liberal imagination is as unreal as the supposed nostalgic Britain of yesteryear loved by Leavers .
Britain , many people fear , is moving away from the European dream and towards fascism .
It ’ s such an established meme that even the most recent BBC Agatha Christie adaptation was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 Yet people keep on coming to this Nazi hellhole , with the fabled “ Brexodus ” of migrants leaving the country actually seeing an extra 212,000 people arriving last year , and with record numbers of foreign students , too .
The fascist Brexit Britain theory is held among a minority of Remainers because they ’ re measuring the country by a theoretical ideal rather than comparing it to other — real — countries .
So while the hate crime “ surge ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incidents , Italy saw a number of openly racist murders during the late 2010s .
Whether they ’ re connected or not , Italy has also had a populist Right-wing government in power for most of the past four years , and the Lega may well return — at around 33 % in the polls , it is by some distance the most popular party .
Italian politics has been , as long as anyone can remember , chaotic and unstable , which makes me wonder if Mary Beard ’ s Italian colleagues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about Brexit have been paying attention to their own country .
A central theme of fascism is a love of violence against ideological opponents , and so a visitor from outer space with a vague understanding of our human political philosophy would probably conclude that there was only one fascist state in the EU — France , where the brutality of the police is on a scale that would be unfathomable in England .
Among the recent victims of the gleefully violent French police is a teenager who lost an eye in Strasbourg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ died from her injuries after being hit by a rubber bullet .
Just this month prosecutors launched a probe after a video appeared to show a policeman firing point-blank at protestors with a riot control gun .
France is quite far down from Britain in the Freedom International rating , and treats minorities like Roma in a way that would do more than embarrass liberal Brits .
Right-wingers often complain that the horrific behaviour of the French police towards the gilets jaunes has received scant coverage in the BBC ; certainly if Hungary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ m pretty sure it would be on our news more .
But then France has always been a politically violent country .
The last mass murder of protesters in England occurred in 1819 , when 18 people were killed by authorities in Manchester ; in France police in Paris killed up to three hundred unarmed protesters in 1961 .
Had anything even vaguely comparable happened during the US Civil Rights era it would have been the subject of about 500 films and even my children in an English primary school @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But then Anglo liberals are fascinated with the Anglo world ; not so much by the continent .
France is different to England , in some ways far more traditional ; for example , the same-sex marriage campaign there was opposed by enormous protests , while , like many continental countries , it has a 12-week limit for abortion , when even talk of a 20 weeks-limit would have the Anglo commentariat dressing up in those Handmaid ’ s Tale outfits .

The apocryphal newspaper headline — “fog in the channel, continent isolated” — famously said something about the British mindset. It’s hardly surprising that we are insular — we are literally an island after all — but this insularity is something that curiously crosses all barriers in British social and political life, whether of Left or Right, middle or working class, and on almost every issue.
This is true even for British liberals who, reeling since the night of 23 June, 2016, have made the continent a sort of spiritual home as they’ve become alienated from their countrymen.
Right-thinking Britons see their country as an embarrassment sliding towards populism, a sad contrast to the moral superpower that is Germany and France under centrist leader Emmanuel Macron. Yet the Continent of the Anglo liberal imagination is as unreal as the supposed nostalgic Britain of yesteryear loved by Leavers.
Italy
Britain, many people fear, is moving away from the European dream and towards fascism. It’s such an established meme that even the most recent BBC Agatha Christie adaptation was a thinly-veiled analogy about 1930s fascism and Brexit.
Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details) Yet people keep on coming to this Nazi hellhole, with the fabled “Brexodus” of migrants leaving the country actually seeing an extra 212,000 people arriving last year, and with record numbers of foreign students, too.
The fascist Brexit Britain theory is held among a minority of Remainers because they’re measuring the country by a theoretical ideal rather than comparing it to other — real — countries. So while the hate crime “surge” following the referendum mostly involved very minor incidents, Italy saw a number of openly racist murders during the late 2010s.
Whether they’re connected or not, Italy has also had a populist Right-wing government in power for most of the past four years, and the Lega may well return — at around 33% in the polls, it is by some distance the most popular party. Italian politics has been, as long as anyone can remember, chaotic and unstable, which makes me wonder if Mary Beard’s Italian colleagues who make her feel “embarrassed” about Brexit have been paying attention to their own country.
France
A central theme of fascism is a love of violence against ideological opponents, and so a visitor from outer space with a vague understanding of our human political philosophy would probably conclude that there was only one fascist state in the EU — France, where the brutality of the police is on a scale that would be unfathomable in England.
Among the recent victims of the gleefully violent French police is a teenager who lost an eye in Strasbourg and an elderly woman in Marseilles who died from her injuries after being hit by a rubber bullet. Just this month prosecutors launched a probe after a video appeared to show a policeman firing point-blank at protestors with a riot control gun.
France is quite far down from Britain in the Freedom International rating, and treats minorities like Roma in a way that would do more than embarrass liberal Brits.
Right-wingers often complain that the horrific behaviour of the French police towards the gilets jaunes has received scant coverage in the BBC; certainly if Hungary or Poland treated their citizens like that, I’m pretty sure it would be on our news more. But then France has always been a politically violent country.
The last mass murder of protesters in England occurred in 1819, when 18 people were killed by authorities in Manchester; in France police in Paris killed up to three hundred unarmed protesters in 1961.
Had anything even vaguely comparable happened during the US Civil Rights era it would have been the subject of about 500 films and even my children in an English primary school would now be learning about it now. But then Anglo liberals are fascinated with the Anglo world; not so much by the continent.
France is different to England, in some ways far more traditional; for example, the same-sex marriage campaign there was opposed by enormous protests, while, like many continental countries, it has a 12-week limit for abortion, when even talk of a 20 weeks-limit would have the Anglo commentariat dressing up in those Handmaid’s Tale outfits.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-01-24--Davos Man – Misbegotten Progeny of Keynesian Central Bankers

There are a reported 119 billionaires attending the Davos confab this year – plus ( allegedly ) the Donald , who took a day off from Impeachment to address this august gathering of the world ’ s movers and shakers .
There is also 1500 private jets crowding the surrounding airports – plus the notable train-traveling 17-year old expert on planetary climate science , Greta Thunberg .
Also , among the 10 billionaires in attendance from communist China is Ren Zhenfei , founder of Huawei and father of its CFO , Meng Wanzhou .
Even as dad courts the rich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ languishes in a Canadian jail waiting extradition to the US because she had the audacity to do business with Iran against Washington ’ s instructions and Trump ’ s latest fatwa against the Tehran government .
These odd juxtapositions plus countless more got us to thinking about Davos Man himself and the ultimate juxtaposition of our times .
To wit , the combined net worth of the world ’ s billionaires in the year 2000 was $ 1 trillion , according to Forbes , but at this bublicious moment that number is reckoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So the 2,150 members of the Billionaires Club now have more net worth than 60 % of the world ’ s population combined .
That ’ s 4.6 billion people !
Peak Trump : The Undrai ... David A. Stockman Best Price : $ 13.88 In so noting , of course , we are not joining the Bernie Sanders/AOC/Pocahontas brigade .
In a world of free markets , honest money and de minimis government , the more billionaires the better .
But what we sincerely doubt is that there was an honest and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the net worth of the Billionaires Club over a two decade period when the world ’ s nominal GDP only rose from $ 35 trillion to $ 85 trillion , or by 2.4X .
After all , the predominately financial assets comprising the world ’ s net worth are merely the capitalization of its underlying income or GDP .
And there is no basis in either sound economics or basic math for the former to grow nearly four times faster than the latter for two decades running .
Stated differently , unless the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repealed by the economic gods themselves , Davos Man is fixing to become nearly as rare as Neanderthal Man or , more to the point , has been a case of Piltdown Man all along .
Recall that the latter had been touted by some British scoundrels in 1912 to be a 500,000 year-old homo sapiens and evolution ’ s missing link .
Alas , it was actually a ho-hum 50,000 year-old human skeleton fused with the jawbone and teeth of a modern orangutan .
Billionaire Haven As it happened , it took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out that Piltdown Man was a hoax , but the hoax attendant to Davos Man is already plain as day .
That ’ s because by even tolerating Greta ’ s impending extinction hysteria and the Donald ’ s hideous Greatest Ever Economy boasts , the assembled billionaires are demonstrating that they are not 4X geniuses after all – just bubble riders on the great central banking hoax of the 21st century .
Indeed , we would suppose that some kind of guilt-tripping would account for the grandly named World Economic Forum ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global warming scam and its intellectually pre-pubescent poster girl , Greta .
But why in the world would the purported deep thinkers of the WEF not laugh the Donald ’ s malarkey right off the stage ?
On the way to Switzerland he tweeted a superlative that would be the envy of the biggest braggart in the school yard : “ We are now NUMBER ONE in the Universe , by FAR !
!
…… .
And then he thickened the goo while at the podium in Davos : America ’ s newfound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anywhere in the world…America made this stunning turnaround not by making minor changes to a handful of policies but by adopting a whole new approach .
Every decision we make…is focused on improving the lives of every day Americans .
We are determined to create the highest standard of living that anyone can imagine.
” Folks , that ’ s just blithering poppycock .
We are at the end of the longest and weakest business cycle expansion in history ( month # 127 ) , yet real median household income has barely returned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The idea that Trump-O-Nomics has anything to do with paving the way for the “ highest standard of living that anyone can imagine ” is just content free bluster .
The facts actually show that the US standard of living has been stagnant for two decades , rising and falling with the business cycle , but gaining on average the grand sum of $ 87 per year ( 2018 $ ) since 1999 .
That ’ s right .
As shown in the graph below , the $ 63,179 median reported for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for years to come , yet it represented a mere 2.7 % gain from the $ 61,526 level ( 2018 $ ) posted way back in 1999 .
While the data for 2019 is not yet available , it is evident that the various categories of income gain last year barely kept up with inflation , meaning that real median family income was flat .
So the coming recession in the early 2020s will send the black bars in the chart sliding lower as they did during and after each of the recessions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s the thing .
The Donald ’ s policies have immensely harmed the foundations on which today ’ s tepidly expanding business cycle rests .
Yet there has been no short-run benefit in terms of accelerating overall GDP growth , and actually a sharp deceleration of business investment and export growth .
Likewise , the vaunted 70 % of GDP attributable to personal consumption spending ( PCE ) is been essentially kept alive by borrowing .
Nearly 67 % of the gain in personal consumption expenditures since Q4 2012 , when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Great Recession , has been accounted for by household debt growth .
The latter ( purple bars ) is up by a fully $ 2.4 trillion to a record $ 16 trillion compared to personal consumption ( PCE ) growth of just $ 3.6 trillion during the same 81 month period .
What the “ strong economy ” gummers forget , of course , is that sooner or later you have to pay the piper when the economy becomes as debt-ridden as today ’ s world .
You are supposed to actually pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cycle , but self-evidently that has not remotely happened this time around the barn .
So you can boast about the Greatest Economy Ever if you are the Donald and reassure about a “ solid ” economy if you are stock-options rich Davos Man , but that doesn ’ t gainsay the unsustainable economic and monetary rot upon which it is all based .
At the end of the day , what the Donald is crowing about is simply the residual momentum of the debt-ridden , growth-impaired economy he inherited , and what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ strong ” economy is actually a mere simulacrum of a real business boom – a fiction slathered in artificially and irrationally soaring share prices and stock options The truth is , we are heading into the strum-und-drang of the Turbulent Twenties , but the alleged adults in the room at Davos don ’ t have a clue .
They apparently think America ’ s three-decade long fantasy of free lunch economics and unhinged partisan warfare is sustainable indefinitely .
It ’ s not .
If you are sitting on phantasmagorical stock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the implications of the central banks ’ $ 25 trillion balance sheet , the world ’ s $ 255 trillion of debt , the Red Ponzi ’ s monumental malinvestment , the Donald ’ s war on trade , immigrants and fiscal sanity , the bipartisan war on constitutional government in America , the Empire ’ s claim to global extraterritoriality and the statist grab for power in the name of a phony climate crisis , then you are not paying attention .
Each and every one of these force vectors are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But the malignancies of runaway debt and egregiously inflated financial bubbles stand front and center .
Here is a graph of US net worth versus national income ( GDP ) gains since Q4 2000 , and it speaks for itself .
To wit : • The net worth of the top 1 % ( brown line ) has soared from $ 11.8 trillion to $ 34.5 trillion or by 193 % ; • The nominal GDP has risen from $ 10.5 trillion to $ 21.5 trillion or by 106 % ; and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bottom 50 % has crept up from $ 1.4 trillion to $ 1.7 trillion or by just 17 % .
Needless to say , when the wealth of the top 1 % ( 1.3 million households ) is growing at nearly twice the rate of national income and by 11X more than the bottom half of households ( 63.5 million ) , there is absolutely nothing sustainable about it .
In fact , it ’ s the reason why the real extinction threat at this week ’ s confab in Switzerland is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about , but of Davos Man himself .
And if they can not tell that Trump is the greatest economic charlatan to ever grace high office in the world ’ s largest economy , they surely well and truly deserve their fate .
The Best of David Stockman

There are a reported 119 billionaires attending the Davos confab this year – plus (allegedly) the Donald, who took a day off from Impeachment to address this august gathering of the world’s movers and shakers.
There is also 1500 private jets crowding the surrounding airports – plus the notable train-traveling 17-year old expert on planetary climate science, Greta Thunberg.
Also, among the 10 billionaires in attendance from communist China is Ren Zhenfei, founder of Huawei and father of its CFO, Meng Wanzhou. Even as dad courts the rich and famous on the slopes, daughter languishes in a Canadian jail waiting extradition to the US because she had the audacity to do business with Iran against Washington’s instructions and Trump’s latest fatwa against the Tehran government.
These odd juxtapositions plus countless more got us to thinking about Davos Man himself and the ultimate juxtaposition of our times.
To wit, the combined net worth of the world’s billionaires in the year 2000 was $1 trillion, according to Forbes, but at this bublicious moment that number is reckoned at just under $10 trillion. So the 2,150 members of the Billionaires Club now have more net worth than 60% of the world’s population combined. That’s 4.6 billion people! Peak Trump: The Undrai... David A. Stockman Best Price: $12.72 Buy New $43.07 (as of 11:40 UTC - Details)
In so noting, of course, we are not joining the Bernie Sanders/AOC/Pocahontas brigade. In a world of free markets, honest money and de minimis government, the more billionaires the better. But what we sincerely doubt is that there was an honest and sustainable basis for a 10X gain in the net worth of the Billionaires Club over a two decade period when the world’s nominal GDP only rose from $35 trillion to $85 trillion, or by 2.4X.
After all, the predominately financial assets comprising the world’s net worth are merely the capitalization of its underlying income or GDP. And there is no basis in either sound economics or basic math for the former to grow nearly four times faster than the latter for two decades running.
Stated differently, unless the age-old laws of sound money have been repealed by the economic gods themselves, Davos Man is fixing to become nearly as rare as Neanderthal Man or, more to the point, has been a case of Piltdown Man all along.
Recall that the latter had been touted by some British scoundrels in 1912 to be a 500,000 year-old homo sapiens and evolution’s missing link. Alas, it was actually a ho-hum 50,000 year-old human skeleton fused with the jawbone and teeth of a modern orangutan.
Billionaire Haven
As it happened, it took the world about three decades to figure out that Piltdown Man was a hoax, but the hoax attendant to Davos Man is already plain as day. That’s because by even tolerating Greta’s impending extinction hysteria and the Donald’s hideous Greatest Ever Economy boasts, the assembled billionaires are demonstrating that they are not 4X geniuses after all – just bubble riders on the great central banking hoax of the 21st century.
Indeed, we would suppose that some kind of guilt-tripping would account for the grandly named World Economic Forum’s (WEF) solicitude for the global warming scam and its intellectually pre-pubescent poster girl, Greta. But why in the world would the purported deep thinkers of the WEF not laugh the Donald’s malarkey right off the stage?
On the way to Switzerland he tweeted a superlative that would be the envy of the biggest braggart in the school yard:
“We are now NUMBER ONE in the Universe, by FAR!!…….
And then he thickened the goo while at the podium in Davos:
America’s newfound prosperity is undeniable, unprecedented and unmatched anywhere in the world…America made this stunning turnaround not by making minor changes to a handful of policies but by adopting a whole new approach. Every decision we make…is focused on improving the lives of every day Americans. We are determined to create the highest standard of living that anyone can imagine.”
Folks, that’s just blithering poppycock. We are at the end of the longest and weakest business cycle expansion in history (month # 127), yet real median household income has barely returned to where it stood two decades ago.
The idea that Trump-O-Nomics has anything to do with paving the way for the “highest standard of living that anyone can imagine” is just content free bluster.
The facts actually show that the US standard of living has been stagnant for two decades, rising and falling with the business cycle, but gaining on average the grand sum of $87 per year (2018 $) since 1999.
That’s right. As shown in the graph below, the $63,179 median reported for 2018 is undoubtedly the high water mark for years to come, yet it represented a mere 2.7% gain from the $61,526 level (2018 $) posted way back in 1999.
While the data for 2019 is not yet available, it is evident that the various categories of income gain last year barely kept up with inflation, meaning that real median family income was flat. So the coming recession in the early 2020s will send the black bars in the chart sliding lower as they did during and after each of the recessions marked by the white space.
Here’s the thing. The Donald’s policies have immensely harmed the foundations on which today’s tepidly expanding business cycle rests. Yet there has been no short-run benefit in terms of accelerating overall GDP growth, and actually a sharp deceleration of business investment and export growth.
Likewise, the vaunted 70% of GDP attributable to personal consumption spending (PCE) is been essentially kept alive by borrowing.
Nearly 67% of the gain in personal consumption expenditures since Q4 2012, when the US economy had fully recovered from the Great Recession, has been accounted for by household debt growth. The latter (purple bars) is up by a fully $2.4 trillion to a record $16 trillion compared to personal consumption (PCE) growth of just $3.6 trillion during the same 81 month period.
What the “strong economy” gummers forget, of course, is that sooner or later you have to pay the piper when the economy becomes as debt-ridden as today’s world. You are supposed to actually pay down debt during the up-phase of the cycle, but self-evidently that has not remotely happened this time around the barn.
So you can boast about the Greatest Economy Ever if you are the Donald and reassure about a “solid” economy if you are stock-options rich Davos Man, but that doesn’t gainsay the unsustainable economic and monetary rot upon which it is all based.
At the end of the day, what the Donald is crowing about is simply the residual momentum of the debt-ridden, growth-impaired economy he inherited, and what the geniuses gathered at Davos are calling a “strong” economy is actually a mere simulacrum of a real business boom – a fiction slathered in artificially and irrationally soaring share prices and stock options
The truth is, we are heading into the strum-und-drang of the Turbulent Twenties, but the alleged adults in the room at Davos don’t have a clue. They apparently think America’s three-decade long fantasy of free lunch economics and unhinged partisan warfare is sustainable indefinitely.
It’s not. If you are sitting on phantasmagorical stock market paper values and not sweating bullets about the implications of the central banks’ $25 trillion balance sheet, the world’s $255 trillion of debt, the Red Ponzi’s monumental malinvestment, the Donald’s war on trade, immigrants and fiscal sanity, the bipartisan war on constitutional government in America, the Empire’s claim to global extraterritoriality and the statist grab for power in the name of a phony climate crisis, then you are not paying attention.
Each and every one of these force vectors are bearing down ominously upon the pathway ahead. But the malignancies of runaway debt and egregiously inflated financial bubbles stand front and center.
Here is a graph of US net worth versus national income (GDP) gains since Q4 2000, and it speaks for itself. To wit:
The net worth of the top 1% (brown line) has soared from $11.8 trillion to $34.5 trillion or by 193% ;
; The nominal GDP has risen from $10.5 trillion to $21.5 trillion or by 106% ; and,
; and, The net worth of the bottom 50% has crept up from $1.4 trillion to $1.7 trillion or by just 17%.
Needless to say, when the wealth of the top 1% (1.3 million households) is growing at nearly twice the rate of national income and by 11X more than the bottom half of households ( 63.5 million), there is absolutely nothing sustainable about it.
In fact, it’s the reason why the real extinction threat at this week’s confab in Switzerland is not the one Greta is scolding her elders about, but of Davos Man himself.
And if they cannot tell that Trump is the greatest economic charlatan to ever grace high office in the world’s largest economy, they surely well and truly deserve their fate.
PEAK TRUMP, IMPENDING CRISES, ESSENTIAL INFO & ACTION
Reprinted with permission from David Stockman’s Contra Corner.
The Best of David Stockman


Expletive Included

In my youth , one of the biggest political events was the Watergate scandal that included the release of tapes of Oval Office conversations .
A surprising and appalling aspect of President Nixon ’ s conversation was his use of foul language , so much so that it was edited from the public transcripts with the words “ expletive deleted.
” The brilliant comedian George Carlin had a classic skit during this period about the seven words you can not say on television .
Carlin was more than funny , but also extraordinarily astute , so it was years later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me the first time I heard an expletive on live television when the Hall of Fame outfielder Andre Dawson said the word “ sh*t ” in a post-game interview .
It must have been the late 80s or early 90s .
Years ago I spent a lovely sojourn on the northwest coast of Ireland in the town called Sligo .
On the train back to Dublin , I was sitting with two university students returning to their campus .
They were engineering students and I was an engineering professor so we had a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both bright and articulate and I remember enjoying the conversation very much .
But they paused in virtually every sentence , as a valley girl would use “ like , ” to interject the word “ f*ck.
” The word did not have any meaning to them .
But still , it was quite astonishing to me .
Several years ago I read the book I Know This Much is True , by Wally Lamb on the suggestion of friends .
I wrote to them about my opinion of the book that included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Now I find expletives included everywhere , all the time , in almost all settings .
I have heard “ sh*t ” from even very devout and conservative Christians on Youtube podcasts .
My 12-year-old daughter will say “ merde , ” the French word for sh*t , on occasion which does not sound too bad to my ears .
But she will also sing along with popular music that can include “ b*tch ” or “ f*ck ” .
I just had a “ merde ” text message from my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspection .
An anonymous correspondent writing in regard to my recent essay on Roman Polanski wrote : “ You should just shut your f*cking pedophile-enabling mouth , ” where I have added the asterisk .
I don ’ t think I am a prude about this .
Up to my middle age , I played sports constantly .
On all playing fields and locker rooms expletives were normal , but not in general conversation , let alone more formal settings .
In fact , I am surprised at how sensitive my ear is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are many complex reasons why such words became taboo due to social , physiological , psychological and religious reasons .
The old taboos have been wiped away .
But we are not left totally free to express ourselves however we would like to because there are new political taboos .
They are so strict we watch our words on all occasions , except perhaps with our closest friends .
I wondered how Mr. Carlin would create comedy based on today ’ s political correctness and found this , but he doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the subversion of the old taboos .
Do the use of swear words ( gros mots , big words in French ) really matter ?
Perhaps this essay is just an old guy ranting .
The late Roger Scruton touches on what is lost when beauty in art , but also language , is abandoned in his documentary Why Beauty Matters ( see the introductory 2 minutes ) .
In the hierarchy of problems in the world the use of foul language is not near the top , but I can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whenever I hear these words in a setting I find inappropriate .
Perhaps this language has been , and continues to be , a portent of the downward spiral of our culture .
The Best of Ira Katz

In my youth, one of the biggest political events was the Watergate scandal that included the release of tapes of Oval Office conversations. A surprising and appalling aspect of President Nixon’s conversation was his use of foul language, so much so that it was edited from the public transcripts with the words “expletive deleted.”
The brilliant comedian George Carlin had a classic skit during this period about the seven words you cannot say on television. Carlin was more than funny, but also extraordinarily astute, so it was years later and a bit of a shock to me the first time I heard an expletive on live television when the Hall of Fame outfielder Andre Dawson said the word “sh*t” in a post-game interview. It must have been the late 80s or early 90s.
Years ago I spent a lovely sojourn on the northwest coast of Ireland in the town called Sligo. On the train back to Dublin, I was sitting with two university students returning to their campus. They were engineering students and I was an engineering professor so we had a common subject to discuss. They were both bright and articulate and I remember enjoying the conversation very much. But they paused in virtually every sentence, as a valley girl would use “like,” to interject the word “f*ck.” The word did not have any meaning to them. But still, it was quite astonishing to me.
Several years ago I read the book I Know This Much is True, by Wally Lamb on the suggestion of friends. I wrote to them about my opinion of the book that included this passage (sorry for quoting myself). handling MR. HYDE: que... Katz, Ira Best Price: $17.20 Buy New $12.98 (as of 04:58 UTC - Details)
Aesthetically I think this was an ugly book, full of ugly language. F*ck was on almost every page. I have recently had scatological words in my thoughts that I hope will soon pass…. Was it necessary to be dragged through the muck for 700 to 800 pages?
Now I find expletives included everywhere, all the time, in almost all settings. I have heard “sh*t” from even very devout and conservative Christians on Youtube podcasts. My 12-year-old daughter will say “merde,” the French word for sh*t, on occasion which does not sound too bad to my ears. But she will also sing along with popular music that can include “b*tch” or “f*ck”. I just had a “merde” text message from my wife when our car did not pass inspection. An anonymous correspondent writing in regard to my recent essay on Roman Polanski wrote: “You should just shut your f*cking pedophile-enabling mouth,” where I have added the asterisk.
I don’t think I am a prude about this. Up to my middle age, I played sports constantly. On all playing fields and locker rooms expletives were normal, but not in general conversation, let alone more formal settings. In fact, I am surprised at how sensitive my ear is to these words.
I suppose there are many complex reasons why such words became taboo due to social, physiological, psychological and religious reasons. The old taboos have been wiped away. But we are not left totally free to express ourselves however we would like to because there are new political taboos. They are so strict we watch our words on all occasions, except perhaps with our closest friends. I wondered how Mr. Carlin would create comedy based on today’s political correctness and found this, but he doesn’t make any connection between the new taboos and the subversion of the old taboos.
Do the use of swear words (gros mots, big words in French) really matter? Perhaps this essay is just an old guy ranting. The late Roger Scruton touches on what is lost when beauty in art, but also language, is abandoned in his documentary Why Beauty Matters (see the introductory 2 minutes). In the hierarchy of problems in the world the use of foul language is not near the top, but I can’t help feel a slight psychological pain whenever I hear these words in a setting I find inappropriate. Perhaps this language has been, and continues to be, a portent of the downward spiral of our culture.
The Best of Ira Katz