TO COMMENT CLICK HERE
welcome to reality trivia
reality is the state of things as they actually exist
may 27, 2023
Real News Today
*THE DEBT LIMIT IS JUST ONE OF AMERICA’S SIX WORST TRADITIONS
Reality
(for previous day's articles see "what's inside" below)
South Carolina Redefines ‘Women’
comment/tweet of the day
NanceGreggs - du
A Tale of Two GOP Pigs
I would vote for a 100-year-old candidate who stands up for women's rights before I would vote for a candidate who thinks women's rights are as trivial as they are expendable.
I would vote for Joe Biden, who is being cast by the GOP as being 'senile', before I would vote for a twice-impeached idiot who suggested nuking hurricanes, injecting bleach to cure Covid, and claimed that the Revolutionary War was won when Americans shut down the airports in 1776.
I would vote for Joe Biden any day over any candidate who bans books, vilifies the LGBT community, and thinks that fighting drag queens and Mickey Mouse is somehow proof of his fitness for office.
Honestly, Republicans, I don't know what you were thinking when you decided that your best shot at regaining the White House was championing a lying failure who tried to overthrow democracy, and/or a spineless jerk-off who thinks the rest of the country actually wants to be the same shithole he has turned Florida into.
In case you haven't noticed - and apparently you haven't - the ignorant MAGAts you are trying so hard to appeal to aren't anywhere near enough voters to elect either of your preferred assholes to the Oval Office.
While I appreciate your valiant efforts to put lipstick on your chosen pigs, they still are, first and foremost, two pigs.
---
PFAS levels in ground and air could be higher than expected, research suggests
High levels of toxic ‘forever chemicals’ found in New Hampshire soil samples raise questions about food and water pollution
Tom Perkins - the guardians
Fri 26 May 2023 10.08 EDT
Background levels of toxic PFAS “forever chemicals” in the ground and air may be much higher than previously thought, federal testing of spatially random soil samples from across New Hampshire suggests.
The analysis found high levels of PFAS in all 100 shallow soil samples, which were taken from undisturbed land not close to known polluters. The chemicals are thought to largely have gotten there through the air, and the study, along with recent EU research, suggests similar levels of soil and air contamination throughout the world.
The findings are “pretty disturbing” and raise fresh questions about contamination of food and water, said Mindi Messmer, a former New Hampshire state representative who advocates for stronger PFAS bans.
“However it got here, it’s there and it is widespread,” she added. “It’s the fault of decades of regulatory inaction.”
PFAS are a class of about 15,000 chemicals often used to make thousands of products resistant to water, stains and heat. The compounds are ubiquitous, and linked at low levels of exposure to cancer, thyroid disease, kidney dysfunction, birth defects, autoimmune disease and other serious health problems. They are called “forever chemicals” because of their longevity in the environment.
PFAS are thought to be contaminating drinking water for more than 200 million Americans. Multiple studies have found rain to contain high PFAS levels and the chemicals have been discovered in ice near the globe’s poles. Regulatory efforts to date have largely focused on addressing water, but researchers have increasingly turned their attention to soil and air contamination, which are linked to water pollution.
The US Geological Survey testing in New Hampshire found PFAS in all samples checked in up to 6in of depth, and largely at levels between .1 part per billion (ppb) and 15 ppb. No limits on PFAS in soil exist federally or in New Hampshire, but the levels are millions of times higher than the US Environmental Protection Agency advisory drinking water threshold for some common PFAS compounds.
Many of the contaminated sites would trigger remediation in Massachusetts, New Hampshire’s southern neighbor, which set limits for individual compounds in soil between .3 and 2 ppb.
More broadly, research led by Stockholm University found global soils are being “ubiquitously contaminated” by four PFAS compounds, and at levels that were often above Dutch limits proposed in 2018.
“In many areas inhabited by humans, the planetary boundary for PFAS has been exceeded based on the levels in rainwater, surface water and soil, with all of these media being widely contaminated,” the paper’s authors wrote.
The Netherlands revised its soil limits upwards after about 70% of building projects at the time were halted because soil remediation was required and builders protested the thresholds, the Stockholm paper noted.
The soil contamination sources are impossible to pinpoint. New Hampshire is home to several major industrial polluters, including the military and fabric producer Saint Gobain. Some of its farms also spread sewage sludge typically contaminated with even higher levels of PFAS as a fertilizer alternative, and the levels may be slightly higher near Saint Gobain, but the chemicals can also travel long distances through the atmosphere, meaning some compounds in New Hampshire’s soil could be from anywhere.
“It is well known that PFAS transport atmospherically and there is long range transport of the chemicals, so there might be some influence of local sources – but what proportion of PFAS we found is local is not known,” said Andrea Tokranov, a research hydrologist with the USGS and study co-author.
The climbing ambient PFAS levels worldwide are the result of the chemicals’ properties, widespread use for over 50 years, and lax regulation, advocates say. Until recent decades, the chemical industry claimed PFAS would be diluted to non-dangerous levels in oceans.
But the chemicals do not break down once they are in the ocean, and instead cycle through the world’s hydrosphere, moving among soil, ground waters, surface waters, oceans, sea spray, the atmosphere and rain. As more PFAS end up in the environment, background levels will continue to climb and exceed limits set by regulators.
“The cycling of [PFAS] in the world’s hydrosphere means that levels of [PFAS] in rainwater will be practically irreversible,” the Stockholm paper’s authors wrote.
Though it is unclear how much of a direct impact the levels found in New Hampshire has on drinking water, it, rain and soil are all part of the same system as rain percolating through soil recharges the groundwater, Tokranov noted.
“Soils are an underlooked category because there’s been a huge emphasis on water … but we have a lot more to learn about environmental levels of PFAS across the country,” she said.
The high background levels may also have an impact on the world’s food supply. Crops can take up PFAS from the soil, or the chemicals end up in beef when cattle eat contaminated food and drink contaminated water.
Though the end impacts on drinking water and food are not totally clear from the New Hampshire study, the direction the findings point is “disconcerting”, Messmer said.
“There is widespread contamination of PFAS chemicals because we’ve had decades of pollution from manufacturers and inaction from a regulatory perspective, and this is the result of that inaction – it’s not OK,” she said.
The analysis found high levels of PFAS in all 100 shallow soil samples, which were taken from undisturbed land not close to known polluters. The chemicals are thought to largely have gotten there through the air, and the study, along with recent EU research, suggests similar levels of soil and air contamination throughout the world.
The findings are “pretty disturbing” and raise fresh questions about contamination of food and water, said Mindi Messmer, a former New Hampshire state representative who advocates for stronger PFAS bans.
“However it got here, it’s there and it is widespread,” she added. “It’s the fault of decades of regulatory inaction.”
PFAS are a class of about 15,000 chemicals often used to make thousands of products resistant to water, stains and heat. The compounds are ubiquitous, and linked at low levels of exposure to cancer, thyroid disease, kidney dysfunction, birth defects, autoimmune disease and other serious health problems. They are called “forever chemicals” because of their longevity in the environment.
PFAS are thought to be contaminating drinking water for more than 200 million Americans. Multiple studies have found rain to contain high PFAS levels and the chemicals have been discovered in ice near the globe’s poles. Regulatory efforts to date have largely focused on addressing water, but researchers have increasingly turned their attention to soil and air contamination, which are linked to water pollution.
The US Geological Survey testing in New Hampshire found PFAS in all samples checked in up to 6in of depth, and largely at levels between .1 part per billion (ppb) and 15 ppb. No limits on PFAS in soil exist federally or in New Hampshire, but the levels are millions of times higher than the US Environmental Protection Agency advisory drinking water threshold for some common PFAS compounds.
Many of the contaminated sites would trigger remediation in Massachusetts, New Hampshire’s southern neighbor, which set limits for individual compounds in soil between .3 and 2 ppb.
More broadly, research led by Stockholm University found global soils are being “ubiquitously contaminated” by four PFAS compounds, and at levels that were often above Dutch limits proposed in 2018.
“In many areas inhabited by humans, the planetary boundary for PFAS has been exceeded based on the levels in rainwater, surface water and soil, with all of these media being widely contaminated,” the paper’s authors wrote.
The Netherlands revised its soil limits upwards after about 70% of building projects at the time were halted because soil remediation was required and builders protested the thresholds, the Stockholm paper noted.
The soil contamination sources are impossible to pinpoint. New Hampshire is home to several major industrial polluters, including the military and fabric producer Saint Gobain. Some of its farms also spread sewage sludge typically contaminated with even higher levels of PFAS as a fertilizer alternative, and the levels may be slightly higher near Saint Gobain, but the chemicals can also travel long distances through the atmosphere, meaning some compounds in New Hampshire’s soil could be from anywhere.
“It is well known that PFAS transport atmospherically and there is long range transport of the chemicals, so there might be some influence of local sources – but what proportion of PFAS we found is local is not known,” said Andrea Tokranov, a research hydrologist with the USGS and study co-author.
The climbing ambient PFAS levels worldwide are the result of the chemicals’ properties, widespread use for over 50 years, and lax regulation, advocates say. Until recent decades, the chemical industry claimed PFAS would be diluted to non-dangerous levels in oceans.
But the chemicals do not break down once they are in the ocean, and instead cycle through the world’s hydrosphere, moving among soil, ground waters, surface waters, oceans, sea spray, the atmosphere and rain. As more PFAS end up in the environment, background levels will continue to climb and exceed limits set by regulators.
“The cycling of [PFAS] in the world’s hydrosphere means that levels of [PFAS] in rainwater will be practically irreversible,” the Stockholm paper’s authors wrote.
Though it is unclear how much of a direct impact the levels found in New Hampshire has on drinking water, it, rain and soil are all part of the same system as rain percolating through soil recharges the groundwater, Tokranov noted.
“Soils are an underlooked category because there’s been a huge emphasis on water … but we have a lot more to learn about environmental levels of PFAS across the country,” she said.
The high background levels may also have an impact on the world’s food supply. Crops can take up PFAS from the soil, or the chemicals end up in beef when cattle eat contaminated food and drink contaminated water.
Though the end impacts on drinking water and food are not totally clear from the New Hampshire study, the direction the findings point is “disconcerting”, Messmer said.
“There is widespread contamination of PFAS chemicals because we’ve had decades of pollution from manufacturers and inaction from a regulatory perspective, and this is the result of that inaction – it’s not OK,” she said.
truth be told
excerpt: Where is the Accountability for the Killers Ushering in the Climate Apocalypse?
Today’s climate crisis dwarfs the 1940s threat of Nazism, the 9/11 attack, or the massive bank robberies that took place during the Reagan & Bush administrations. It threatens all life on earth…
THOM HARTMANN
MAY 25, 2023
...For over 50 years, the top executives of that industry have known their products would produce this exact result: a crisis that is killing an average of around 7,500 Americans a year (and over a million worldwide) and promises to kill hundreds of millions within a decade or two.
But instead of doing anything of consequence to mitigate the damage of their operations, they instead funded a massive, 50-year-long campaign to lie to the American people, cloud the science, and buy off Republican politicians.
President Biden, as part of his negotiations with Kevin McCarthy, has proposed reducing the budget deficit by $31 billion through cutting about five percent of the subsidies you and I give to the fossil fuel industry every year through our tax dollars. McCarthy, in the pocket of Big Oil, has said he won’t even consider the proposal.
Famed climate scientist James Hansen is working on a paper outlining the dimensions of the disaster facing humanity at the hands of the fossil fuel industry, and it’s shocking. My friend and colleague Thomas Neuburger did a deep dive into it this week in his excellent God’s Spies Substack newsletter that’s well worth the read.
In essence, Hansen is proposing that the world will soon see both a collapse of the Gulf Stream that keeps Europe’s climate capable of growing crops and a worldwide 60-meter rise in sea levels. Possibly in our children’s or grandchildren’s lifetimes. As Thomas dryly notes in God’s Spies: “For Americans, 60 meters is about 200 feet.”
Deaths worldwide both directly from such an outcome — and from the wars that will result in the destruction of entire civilizations — will be measured in billions; here in America it’ll certainly be in the millions, and probably the tens of millions. Not to mention it speeding up the ongoing species collapse often referred as the Sixth Mass Extinction.
This is what the fossil fuel industry has brought to us, and to this day is aggressively trying to continue to sell to us. Fully aware of what they are doing.
Earlier this week the World Meteorological Organization published an in-depth report with the top-line conclusion summarizing the damage these fossil fuel executives have already inflicted on our planet and our lives, all while funding climate denial and paying off politicians worldwide:
“Between 1970 and 2021, there were 11,778 reported disasters [worldwide] attributed to weather, climate, and water extremes. They caused 2,087,229 deaths and US$ 4.3 trillion in economic losses.”
Last week One Earth published a peer-reviewed analysis of the cost of all this damage, quantifying it by the 21 largest fossil fuel companies around the world. They concluded that those decision-making executives of the fossil fuel industry have inflicted over $5.4 trillion in identifiable economic damages on the rest of us which, instead of paying for, they have greedily converted to their own profit.
The report notes:
The “costs of anthropogenic climate change are chiefly borne by states that compensate their own citizens harmed by climate impacts or contribute to international adaptation finance, by insurance companies with regard to their insureds, and by uncompensated victims of climate change.”
In other words, the fossil fuel companies produced the global warming and cancer-causing emissions, but when people are damaged by them or the weather they are changing, government and insurance companies pay the cost.
The fossil fuel companies and their executives pay nothing, and never have. If they can keep the GOP in their pocket, they hope they never will.
Therefore, Earth One is calling for specific reparations, paid for by those companies:
“We argue that other agents bear substantial responsibility for the cost of redressing climate harm: the companies that engage in the exploration, production, refining, and distribution of oil, gas, and coal.
“The recent progress in climate attribution science makes it evident that these companies have played a major role in the accumulation and escalation of such costs by providing gigatonnes of carbon fuels to the global economy while willfully ignoring foreseeable climate harm.
“All the while they successfully shaped the public narrative on climate change through disinformation, misleading ‘advertorials,’ lobbying, and political donations to delay action directly or through trade associations and other surrogates.” (emphasis mine)
So, what can we do?
I see two possibilities, the first involving the law, and the second using the marketplace and, if that doesn’t work fast enough, the Fifth Amendment’s eminent domain provision.
First, the law:
Article 16 of the 1992 Rio Declaration explicitly calls for fossil fuel producers to pay for the damage their products and extraction processes produce. Thus, Earth One argues, Saudi Aramco (as the largest example) has cost the world so much that they should pay $43 billion a year in reparations for the next 25 years. While that seems like a lot of money, Saudi Aramco’s revenue in 2022 was $604 billion, spinning off $161 billion in pure profit.
Most of it’s executives and stockholders are already morbidly rich; this will put nobody in the poorhouse.[...]
But instead of doing anything of consequence to mitigate the damage of their operations, they instead funded a massive, 50-year-long campaign to lie to the American people, cloud the science, and buy off Republican politicians.
President Biden, as part of his negotiations with Kevin McCarthy, has proposed reducing the budget deficit by $31 billion through cutting about five percent of the subsidies you and I give to the fossil fuel industry every year through our tax dollars. McCarthy, in the pocket of Big Oil, has said he won’t even consider the proposal.
Famed climate scientist James Hansen is working on a paper outlining the dimensions of the disaster facing humanity at the hands of the fossil fuel industry, and it’s shocking. My friend and colleague Thomas Neuburger did a deep dive into it this week in his excellent God’s Spies Substack newsletter that’s well worth the read.
In essence, Hansen is proposing that the world will soon see both a collapse of the Gulf Stream that keeps Europe’s climate capable of growing crops and a worldwide 60-meter rise in sea levels. Possibly in our children’s or grandchildren’s lifetimes. As Thomas dryly notes in God’s Spies: “For Americans, 60 meters is about 200 feet.”
Deaths worldwide both directly from such an outcome — and from the wars that will result in the destruction of entire civilizations — will be measured in billions; here in America it’ll certainly be in the millions, and probably the tens of millions. Not to mention it speeding up the ongoing species collapse often referred as the Sixth Mass Extinction.
This is what the fossil fuel industry has brought to us, and to this day is aggressively trying to continue to sell to us. Fully aware of what they are doing.
Earlier this week the World Meteorological Organization published an in-depth report with the top-line conclusion summarizing the damage these fossil fuel executives have already inflicted on our planet and our lives, all while funding climate denial and paying off politicians worldwide:
“Between 1970 and 2021, there were 11,778 reported disasters [worldwide] attributed to weather, climate, and water extremes. They caused 2,087,229 deaths and US$ 4.3 trillion in economic losses.”
Last week One Earth published a peer-reviewed analysis of the cost of all this damage, quantifying it by the 21 largest fossil fuel companies around the world. They concluded that those decision-making executives of the fossil fuel industry have inflicted over $5.4 trillion in identifiable economic damages on the rest of us which, instead of paying for, they have greedily converted to their own profit.
The report notes:
The “costs of anthropogenic climate change are chiefly borne by states that compensate their own citizens harmed by climate impacts or contribute to international adaptation finance, by insurance companies with regard to their insureds, and by uncompensated victims of climate change.”
In other words, the fossil fuel companies produced the global warming and cancer-causing emissions, but when people are damaged by them or the weather they are changing, government and insurance companies pay the cost.
The fossil fuel companies and their executives pay nothing, and never have. If they can keep the GOP in their pocket, they hope they never will.
Therefore, Earth One is calling for specific reparations, paid for by those companies:
“We argue that other agents bear substantial responsibility for the cost of redressing climate harm: the companies that engage in the exploration, production, refining, and distribution of oil, gas, and coal.
“The recent progress in climate attribution science makes it evident that these companies have played a major role in the accumulation and escalation of such costs by providing gigatonnes of carbon fuels to the global economy while willfully ignoring foreseeable climate harm.
“All the while they successfully shaped the public narrative on climate change through disinformation, misleading ‘advertorials,’ lobbying, and political donations to delay action directly or through trade associations and other surrogates.” (emphasis mine)
So, what can we do?
I see two possibilities, the first involving the law, and the second using the marketplace and, if that doesn’t work fast enough, the Fifth Amendment’s eminent domain provision.
First, the law:
Article 16 of the 1992 Rio Declaration explicitly calls for fossil fuel producers to pay for the damage their products and extraction processes produce. Thus, Earth One argues, Saudi Aramco (as the largest example) has cost the world so much that they should pay $43 billion a year in reparations for the next 25 years. While that seems like a lot of money, Saudi Aramco’s revenue in 2022 was $604 billion, spinning off $161 billion in pure profit.
Most of it’s executives and stockholders are already morbidly rich; this will put nobody in the poorhouse.[...]
Welcome to RepublicanDebt.org
This site tracks the current Republican Debt.
The Republican Debt is how much of the national debt of the United States
is attributable to
the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush,
George W. Bush, Donald J. Trump,
and
the Republican fiscal policy of Borrow-And-Spend.
As of Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 5:23:29PM PT,
The Current Republican Debt is:
$30,535,860,891,532.60
which means that in a total of 24 years,
these four presidents have led to the creation of
of the entire national debt
97.03%
in only 9.7166% of the 247 years of the existence of the United States of America.
JP Morgan profited from Jeffrey Epstein for years while aware of his sex offenses: report
Sky Palma - raw story
May 26, 2023, 9:59 AM ET
In a nearly nine-hour deposition back in March, a JP Morgan executive testified that she was aware of Jeffrey Epstein's status as a sex offender and that he had the potential to harm more victims, but she didn't think it was her job to remove him as a client, The Washington Post reported.
The U.S. Virgin Islands, where Epstein owned a private island and a mansion, says the bank helped fund Epstein's abuse and child sex trafficking and cites the executive's testimony as proof the bank knew what he was up to years before they severed ties with him in 2013.
“We all now understand that Epstein’s behavior was monstrous, and his victims deserve justice — but these suits are misplaced as we did not help him commit his heinous crimes,” JPMorgan spokeswoman Patricia Wexler said in a statement.
The executive, Mary Erdoes, who heads the bank's asset and wealth management division, said she didn't think it was her responsibility to remove Epstein as a client. Records read during the deposition show Erdoes’s supervisor Jes Staley, who was a close friend of Epstein's, did investigate the allegations by asking the billionaire financier about them.
"Attorneys bringing the lawsuit have sought testimony or documents from a wide array of people who had varying levels of contact with Epstein, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, who is scheduled to be deposed Friday," The Post's report stated. "U.S. Virgin Islands Gov. Albert Bryan Jr. is set to give a deposition on June 6. JPMorgan in a filing Thursday accused government officials on the islands of shielding Epstein from law enforcement officials in exchange for political donations. Attorneys for the U.S. Virgin Islands called the claim 'an obvious attempt to shift blame away from JPMorgan Chase.'"
Attorneys for the Virgin Islands say JPMorgan “knowingly facilitated, sustained, and concealed” Epstein’s human trafficking operation while profiting from deals and clients Epstein brought to the bank.
Read the full report over at The Washington Post.
The U.S. Virgin Islands, where Epstein owned a private island and a mansion, says the bank helped fund Epstein's abuse and child sex trafficking and cites the executive's testimony as proof the bank knew what he was up to years before they severed ties with him in 2013.
“We all now understand that Epstein’s behavior was monstrous, and his victims deserve justice — but these suits are misplaced as we did not help him commit his heinous crimes,” JPMorgan spokeswoman Patricia Wexler said in a statement.
The executive, Mary Erdoes, who heads the bank's asset and wealth management division, said she didn't think it was her responsibility to remove Epstein as a client. Records read during the deposition show Erdoes’s supervisor Jes Staley, who was a close friend of Epstein's, did investigate the allegations by asking the billionaire financier about them.
"Attorneys bringing the lawsuit have sought testimony or documents from a wide array of people who had varying levels of contact with Epstein, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, who is scheduled to be deposed Friday," The Post's report stated. "U.S. Virgin Islands Gov. Albert Bryan Jr. is set to give a deposition on June 6. JPMorgan in a filing Thursday accused government officials on the islands of shielding Epstein from law enforcement officials in exchange for political donations. Attorneys for the U.S. Virgin Islands called the claim 'an obvious attempt to shift blame away from JPMorgan Chase.'"
Attorneys for the Virgin Islands say JPMorgan “knowingly facilitated, sustained, and concealed” Epstein’s human trafficking operation while profiting from deals and clients Epstein brought to the bank.
Read the full report over at The Washington Post.
in the land of stupid!!!
Kandiss Taylor: 'The Earth Is Double-Sided'
Kandiss Taylor gets mocked by a comedienne and keeps coming back for more.
stupid attracts stupid
THE DAILY TRASH REPORT featuring today's despicables
thomas jefferson called them "waste people" and benjamin franklin called them "rubbish" we call them "maga people"
WHEN THE STUPID AND THE RACISTS ELECT YOUR POLITICAL LEADERS, THIS IS WHAT YOU GET!!
Nikki Haley ducks questions about stalling on Confederate flag removal when she was governor
fleecing the suckers!!!
Hucksters are suckering MAGA supporters into buying worthless 'Trump Bucks': report
Tom Boggioni - eaw story
May 27, 2023, 11:22 AM ET
According to a report from NBC, scam operations with names like Patriots Dynasty and US Patriots have been selling so-called "Trump Bucks" to fans of the recently indicted Donald Trump with a promise of growing rich -- except they are worth nothing.
NBC's Brandy Zadrozny and Corky Siemaszko are reporting that the Federal Trade Commission has confirmed receiving complaints about the scam and that the Better Business Bureau has given the three Colorado companies involved, Patriots Dynasty, Patriots Future and USA Patriots, an "F" rating with terible reviews pouring in.
According to the report, the companies are "peddling 'Trump Bucks,' which are emblazoned with photos of the former president, and advertising them online as a kind of golden ticket that will help propel Trump’s 2024 bid and make the 'real patriots' who support him rich when cashed in."
However, as one buyer pointed out, he feels ripped off after taking them to the bank and finding they are worthless.
"John Amann told NBC News he bought $2,200 worth of Trump Bucks and other items over the past year only to discover they were worthless when he tried to cash them in at his local bank. So he’s gone on Twitter to warn other Trump supporters not to fall for this scam," the report states before adding, "Additionally, NBC News has found at least a dozen people like Amann who say they invested thousands of dollars after watching the pitches on Telegram and other websites that strongly suggested that Trump himself was endorsing these products."
Noting that there is no evidence that the former president is involved or even aware of the scam, NBC reports, "Repeated attempts to reach representatives for the companies by phone and email were unsuccessful. But Bank of America spokesman Bill Halldin said he’s heard reports from bank employees of customers coming in to exchange their Trump Bucks for actual cash, but the bank routinely turns them down."
According to Halldin, "It’s hard to put a number on how many people have come in."
As for the 77-year-old Amann, "There’s no way to cash out what I have."
You can read more here.
NBC's Brandy Zadrozny and Corky Siemaszko are reporting that the Federal Trade Commission has confirmed receiving complaints about the scam and that the Better Business Bureau has given the three Colorado companies involved, Patriots Dynasty, Patriots Future and USA Patriots, an "F" rating with terible reviews pouring in.
According to the report, the companies are "peddling 'Trump Bucks,' which are emblazoned with photos of the former president, and advertising them online as a kind of golden ticket that will help propel Trump’s 2024 bid and make the 'real patriots' who support him rich when cashed in."
However, as one buyer pointed out, he feels ripped off after taking them to the bank and finding they are worthless.
"John Amann told NBC News he bought $2,200 worth of Trump Bucks and other items over the past year only to discover they were worthless when he tried to cash them in at his local bank. So he’s gone on Twitter to warn other Trump supporters not to fall for this scam," the report states before adding, "Additionally, NBC News has found at least a dozen people like Amann who say they invested thousands of dollars after watching the pitches on Telegram and other websites that strongly suggested that Trump himself was endorsing these products."
Noting that there is no evidence that the former president is involved or even aware of the scam, NBC reports, "Repeated attempts to reach representatives for the companies by phone and email were unsuccessful. But Bank of America spokesman Bill Halldin said he’s heard reports from bank employees of customers coming in to exchange their Trump Bucks for actual cash, but the bank routinely turns them down."
According to Halldin, "It’s hard to put a number on how many people have come in."
As for the 77-year-old Amann, "There’s no way to cash out what I have."
You can read more here.
Sanders Leads Senate Call to Investigate Price-Gouging Military Contractors
Even as it claims to oppose wasteful spending, the GOP pushes for more military funding in debt ceiling talks.
By Jake Johnson , COMMONDREAMS - truthout
Published May 25, 2023
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday led a group of senators in urging the Pentagon to investigate price gouging by military contractors after a CBS News probe that aired on “60 Minutes” earlier this week confirmed that private corporations are drastically overcharging the Defense Department for weaponry and other equipment, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in excess taxpayer spending and huge profits for the arms industry.
“The six-month investigation by CBS News, including extensive interviews with former DOD contracting officials, uncovered massive overcharges from defense contractors accounting for hundreds of millions of dollars,” reads a letter that Sanders and four of his Senate colleagues — Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts), Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Mike Braun (R-Indiana), and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) — sent to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.
“As CBS reported, DOD’s fixed price contracts would often provide for private profits of 12-15%,” the letter continues. “Pentagon analysts found overcharges that boosted total profits to nearly 40% and sometimes as high as 4,000%. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and TransDigm are among the offenders, dramatically overcharging the department and U.S. taxpayers while reaping enormous profits, seeing their stock prices soar, and handing out massive executive compensation packages.”
The senators also fault the Pentagon for staggering oversight failures, noting that the “60 Minutes” investigation “underlines longstanding concerns around the department’s inability to pass an audit, accurately track its finances, or mitigate against fraud risk in the hundreds of billions of dollars in contracts it awards every year.”
In 2021, Sanders, Wyden, Grassley, and other lawmakers teamed up to introduce legislation that would require the Pentagon to pass a full, independent audit. The bill did not get a floor vote in either chamber of Congress.
“The DOD can no longer expect Congress or the American taxpayer to underwrite record military spending while simultaneously failing to account for the hundreds of billions it hands out every year to spectacularly profitable private corporations,” the letter reads. “We ask that you please provide us an update on the department’s efforts to implement outstanding GAO recommendations related to financial management and fraud risk reduction, as well as your efforts to investigate the price gouging uncovered by CBS‘ recent reporting.”
The senators’ letter comes as the Pentagon is requesting $842 billion for fiscal year 2024 and as Republicans are pushing for higher military spending in debt ceiling talks with the Biden White House, even amid fresh evidence of wasteful spending that they claim to oppose.
The U.S. currently spends more on its military than over 144 countries combined, and roughly half of the Pentagon’s annual budget ends up in the coffers of private corporations which — according to a recent Defense Department-backed study — are “profitable” and “generate substantial amounts of cash beyond their needs for operations or capital investment.”
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote earlier this week that the Pentagon’s systematic and persistent oversight lapses will likely “be exacerbated by the push to rapidly expand production to deal with supplying Ukraine and stockpiling systems relevant to a potential conflict with China.”
“Proposals to push weapons out the door more quickly with less scrutiny, coupled with the sheer volume of systems being produced, will open the way to additional price gouging,” Hartung warned.
“As spending rises and vetting decreases, the prospects for fraud, waste, and abuse will grow,” he added. “And the arms industry and its allies in Congress and the Pentagon are intent on making any changes made to deal with the Ukraine emergency permanent, which could supersize the weapons industry while reducing oversight and accountability — a recipe for relentless, unnecessary price increases that could continue well beyond the end of the Ukraine war.”
“The six-month investigation by CBS News, including extensive interviews with former DOD contracting officials, uncovered massive overcharges from defense contractors accounting for hundreds of millions of dollars,” reads a letter that Sanders and four of his Senate colleagues — Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts), Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Mike Braun (R-Indiana), and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) — sent to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.
“As CBS reported, DOD’s fixed price contracts would often provide for private profits of 12-15%,” the letter continues. “Pentagon analysts found overcharges that boosted total profits to nearly 40% and sometimes as high as 4,000%. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and TransDigm are among the offenders, dramatically overcharging the department and U.S. taxpayers while reaping enormous profits, seeing their stock prices soar, and handing out massive executive compensation packages.”
The senators also fault the Pentagon for staggering oversight failures, noting that the “60 Minutes” investigation “underlines longstanding concerns around the department’s inability to pass an audit, accurately track its finances, or mitigate against fraud risk in the hundreds of billions of dollars in contracts it awards every year.”
In 2021, Sanders, Wyden, Grassley, and other lawmakers teamed up to introduce legislation that would require the Pentagon to pass a full, independent audit. The bill did not get a floor vote in either chamber of Congress.
“The DOD can no longer expect Congress or the American taxpayer to underwrite record military spending while simultaneously failing to account for the hundreds of billions it hands out every year to spectacularly profitable private corporations,” the letter reads. “We ask that you please provide us an update on the department’s efforts to implement outstanding GAO recommendations related to financial management and fraud risk reduction, as well as your efforts to investigate the price gouging uncovered by CBS‘ recent reporting.”
The senators’ letter comes as the Pentagon is requesting $842 billion for fiscal year 2024 and as Republicans are pushing for higher military spending in debt ceiling talks with the Biden White House, even amid fresh evidence of wasteful spending that they claim to oppose.
The U.S. currently spends more on its military than over 144 countries combined, and roughly half of the Pentagon’s annual budget ends up in the coffers of private corporations which — according to a recent Defense Department-backed study — are “profitable” and “generate substantial amounts of cash beyond their needs for operations or capital investment.”
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote earlier this week that the Pentagon’s systematic and persistent oversight lapses will likely “be exacerbated by the push to rapidly expand production to deal with supplying Ukraine and stockpiling systems relevant to a potential conflict with China.”
“Proposals to push weapons out the door more quickly with less scrutiny, coupled with the sheer volume of systems being produced, will open the way to additional price gouging,” Hartung warned.
“As spending rises and vetting decreases, the prospects for fraud, waste, and abuse will grow,” he added. “And the arms industry and its allies in Congress and the Pentagon are intent on making any changes made to deal with the Ukraine emergency permanent, which could supersize the weapons industry while reducing oversight and accountability — a recipe for relentless, unnecessary price increases that could continue well beyond the end of the Ukraine war.”
RAPIST!!!
|
gop presidental candidates for the right to destroy america
|
the fraudulent scotus!!!
Supreme Court Ruling Opens Millions of Acres of Wetlands to Pollution
Environmental advocates said the decision poses an “existential threat” to tens of millions of acres of wetlands.
By Sharon Zhang , TRUTHOUT
Published May 25, 2023
The Supreme Court issued a ruling on Thursday that severely curtails the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate water pollution in the latest of the far right justices’ crusade against environmental regulations.
In a 5-4 decision, with the three liberal justices and Brett Kavanaugh disagreeing, the Court ruled that the EPA’s jurisdiction over protecting the “waters of the United States” — which is subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act — has been too wide.
Environmental advocates, legal experts and the EPA have held that the agency can protect both “navigable waters” like lakes and rivers, and bodies of water like marshes, bogs, and other wetlands under the Clean Water Act. But writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS, are limited to wetlands with “a continuous surface connection” to large bodies of water.
This is an extreme decision that will exclude tens of millions of acres of wetlands from EPA protection from pollution, affecting roughly half of the country’s wetlands. Earthjustice senior vice president of programs Sam Sankar said that it will pose an “existential threat from polluters and developers” to wetlands that have long been protected from pollution.
Even far right Kavanaugh acknowledged the extremism of the new definition in a separate opinion, which was joined by Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The majority decision “departs from the statutory text, from 45 years of consistent agency practice, and from this Court’s precedents,” Kavanaugh wrote.
“By narrowing the act’s coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the court’s new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States,” he continued.
Writing for the three liberals on the Court, Kagan wrote that the decision is yet another show of the far right justices having appointed themselves the sole decision makers on the environment. She compared Thursday’s decision to last year’s similarly extremist 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which limited the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
“The vice in both instances is the same: the Court’s appointment of itself as the national decision-maker on environmental policy,” Kagan wrote.
Though the Court differed vastly in its reasoning, all of the justices nominally agreed that the lower courts had ruled incorrectly and that the homeowners who brought the case should not have been subject to EPA regulation.
The case was brought by a couple from Idaho, Michael and Chantell Sackett, who were stopped by the EPA when trying to build a house on a wetland in the state. Though the couple could have obtained a permit that would likely have cleared them for the construction, they instead sued the government. This is the second time that the case has been brought before the High Court.
The Sacketts were picked as plaintiffs in the case by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a dark money and Koch family-tied group with a long history of initiating legal action against progressive policies, including a failed lawsuit against President Joe Biden’s student debt relief program.
Legal and environmental experts have said that the majority’s decision is unscientific and bucks the law in favor of handing a win to big developers and conservative activists who have long sought to weaken the Clean Water Act and WOTUS.
“If you want to feel really cynical about the Supreme Court — if you want to see how a majority has an infinite number of tools at its disposal to override the words that Congress wrote and instead enshrine a conservative agenda into law — read Alito’s opinion in [Sackett v. EPA]. Honestly, it’s like he’s barely even trying,” wrote Mark Joseph Stern for Slate.
“Alito relied almost entirely on policy arguments, peppering them with legalese to create the impression of an actual legal opinion. It doesn’t work, but who cares?,” Stern continued. “The court has anointed itself the final arbiter of every controversy in the land, and if it thinks the Clean Water Act goes too far, then, well, it’s the court’s sacred duty to rewrite it.”
In a 5-4 decision, with the three liberal justices and Brett Kavanaugh disagreeing, the Court ruled that the EPA’s jurisdiction over protecting the “waters of the United States” — which is subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act — has been too wide.
Environmental advocates, legal experts and the EPA have held that the agency can protect both “navigable waters” like lakes and rivers, and bodies of water like marshes, bogs, and other wetlands under the Clean Water Act. But writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS, are limited to wetlands with “a continuous surface connection” to large bodies of water.
This is an extreme decision that will exclude tens of millions of acres of wetlands from EPA protection from pollution, affecting roughly half of the country’s wetlands. Earthjustice senior vice president of programs Sam Sankar said that it will pose an “existential threat from polluters and developers” to wetlands that have long been protected from pollution.
Even far right Kavanaugh acknowledged the extremism of the new definition in a separate opinion, which was joined by Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The majority decision “departs from the statutory text, from 45 years of consistent agency practice, and from this Court’s precedents,” Kavanaugh wrote.
“By narrowing the act’s coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the court’s new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States,” he continued.
Writing for the three liberals on the Court, Kagan wrote that the decision is yet another show of the far right justices having appointed themselves the sole decision makers on the environment. She compared Thursday’s decision to last year’s similarly extremist 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which limited the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
“The vice in both instances is the same: the Court’s appointment of itself as the national decision-maker on environmental policy,” Kagan wrote.
Though the Court differed vastly in its reasoning, all of the justices nominally agreed that the lower courts had ruled incorrectly and that the homeowners who brought the case should not have been subject to EPA regulation.
The case was brought by a couple from Idaho, Michael and Chantell Sackett, who were stopped by the EPA when trying to build a house on a wetland in the state. Though the couple could have obtained a permit that would likely have cleared them for the construction, they instead sued the government. This is the second time that the case has been brought before the High Court.
The Sacketts were picked as plaintiffs in the case by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a dark money and Koch family-tied group with a long history of initiating legal action against progressive policies, including a failed lawsuit against President Joe Biden’s student debt relief program.
Legal and environmental experts have said that the majority’s decision is unscientific and bucks the law in favor of handing a win to big developers and conservative activists who have long sought to weaken the Clean Water Act and WOTUS.
“If you want to feel really cynical about the Supreme Court — if you want to see how a majority has an infinite number of tools at its disposal to override the words that Congress wrote and instead enshrine a conservative agenda into law — read Alito’s opinion in [Sackett v. EPA]. Honestly, it’s like he’s barely even trying,” wrote Mark Joseph Stern for Slate.
“Alito relied almost entirely on policy arguments, peppering them with legalese to create the impression of an actual legal opinion. It doesn’t work, but who cares?,” Stern continued. “The court has anointed itself the final arbiter of every controversy in the land, and if it thinks the Clean Water Act goes too far, then, well, it’s the court’s sacred duty to rewrite it.”
Bites from Real News
*5/27/2023*
*The women of MAGA remain a mystery
... In a particularly gross error, too many Americans still believe, contrary to the empirical evidence, that the many tens of millions of their fellow countrymen and countrywomen who are committed to Trumpism, and support the Republican fascist party and "conservative" movement more generally, are fundamentally good and decent people who will abandon such values if "we just listen to them", and "find common ground" and "educate them" about "the facts." Such an outcome will not happen. Such attempts are wasted energy...
CHAUNCEY DEVEGA
*The Debt Ceiling is just “Two Santas” in Drag
The republicans are dropping their Two Santas bomb right onto President Joe Biden’s head. It worked against Clinton & Obama and the media never caught…
*'Very bad news indeed': Study sounds alarm on threat of deep ocean current collapse
*THE U.S. IS UNHAPPY THAT MEXICO IS SPENDING MONEY ON ITS OWN CITIZENS
Mexico’s populist president should instead be spending more on furthering U.S. interests, according to a leaked intelligence document. JOSÉ OLIVARES
*Violence is the next Republican grift
Republicans know more death enhances their power
CHAUNCEY DEVEGA
*ARTERIAL MOTIVES In the “Wild West” of Outpatient Vascular Care, Doctors Can Reap Huge Payments as Patients Risk Life and Limb
To move vascular procedures out of expensive hospitals, the government turbocharged payments to doctors’ offices. Instead of saving money, it started a boom that is making doctors rich and putting patients in danger.
*Newsom knocks Target CEO for pulling LGBTQ merchandise from stores
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on Tuesday slammed Target’s chief executive for pulling LGBTQ and Pride Month merchandise from store shelves after facing backlash and threats of violence from some cust ... (The hill)
*bullshit: Chief Justice John Roberts defends Supreme Court's highest standards of conduct, offers no new rules
In his first televised public remarks since the pandemic, Chief Justice John Roberts defended the integrity of the Supreme Court in the face of slumping public approval and growing political pressure after a recent barrage of misconduct allegations. ... (ABC News)'Very bad news indeed': Study sounds alarm on threat of deep ocean current collapse'Very bad news indeed': Study sounds alarm on threat of deep ocean current collapse
IN THE LAND OF STUPID!!!
Indian Official Suspended After Draining Reservoir to Save Busted Phone
BUT IT WAS NEW!
Chris Hippensteel
Breaking News Intern
Published May. 27, 2023 1:05PM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
A government official in India really, really didn’t want to buy a new phone after he dropped his into the water—so he did the reasonable thing and drained an entire reservoir to get it back. 32-year-old food inspector Rajesh Vishwas fumbled his brand-new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra, which he said contained government data, into a reservoir in central India on May 21, the New York Times reported. After some locals he enlisted to dive in search of the phone came up empty, Vishwas used a diesel pump to drain three feet of water. He eventually found his phone—which was, predictably, broken. Now he’s been removed from his job and is facing a media firestorm for wasting enough water to supply 1,500 acres of crops in an often drought-stricken country.
Trans Athletes in California Miss Competition Amid Ongoing Harassment
NO SHOWS
Chris Hippensteel
Breaking News Intern
Published May. 27, 2023 12:25PM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
Two transgender runners in California dropped out of the state’s preliminary track and field championship after a campaign of online and in-person harassment against them. The two runners—who had finished third and second place in the girls’ 1,600 meter event in separate sectional meets—didn’t appear at the starting line at the state event, the Los Angeles Times reported. Their absence came after ruthless online attacks and harassment at their earlier meets. A spectator shouted “Trip her!” at one of the runners, while another had anti-trans protesters show up to her meet. The state’s governing body told the Times it is “disappointed for two of our student-athletes and their families because due to the actions of others, they found it necessary to withdraw from the event.”
the key to republican support
*What's Inside*
ACTUALLY, IT’S NOT “OK TO BE WHITE”
RACE MATTERS
HUMAN LIFE IS CHEAP IN THE USA BY THE RUDE PUNDIT
COMMENTARY
*WORKERS FIGHTING UNION-BUSTING MAY HAVE A NEW LEGAL TOOL AT THEIR DISPOSAL
SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY
*THE "PARTY OF LIFE" GOP IS OK WITH 700,000+ DYING OF POVERTY
COMMENTARY
*REFINED CARBS AND RED MEAT DRIVING GLOBAL RISE IN TYPE 2 DIABETES, STUDY SAYS
REALITY
*VOLCANIC MICROBE EATS CO2 ‘ASTONISHINGLY QUICKLY’, SAY SCIENTISTS
ENVIRONMENT
*UNCLE CLARENCE THOMAS AND OTHER HOUSE NEGROES
COMMENTARY
*EXCERPT: IS THE PLAGUE OF GUNS A RACIST FEVER DREAM FOR “RESTORED” WHITE MALE SUPREMACY?( WHITE SUPREMACY)
*late news of interest*
A Meditation On Practical Applications Of Stupidity
The Mystery of Anti-Vax & Anti-Mask
Kat Ignatz - DAILY KOS
Sunday August 01, 2021 · 5:00 AM PDT
...“The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity” seems as good a way as any to explain the insane situation we’re in. It’s speculative, but in my opinion, guessing is all we’ve really got right now.
In his essay, Cipolla divides human beings into four categories and builds his theory on these characteristics.
His categories are:
And he presents his theory as five laws:
Taking Cipolla’s laws and looking for correlations with anti-vax/mask behavior, you can map out anti-vax/mask actions like this:
And you could do the same matching of Cipolla’s laws with anti-vax/mask actions, and together, we could come up with a big, five-part list of parallels between Cipolla’s theory and the anti-vax/mask movement.
And it would prove nothing.
But looking at it might make you wonder, like me, if there’s anything but dangerous, illogical, and incomprehensible behavior there.
Cipolla doesn’t explain stupid people. He simply says that they exist, and they’re irrational, unpredictable, and hazardous. He states that irrational people can’t be understood by rational minds and cautions against getting involved with irrational people because it always comes with a cost that’s often a big cost.
He says the only hope is for rational people to create more gains than the losses that irrational people cause. He was an economist so his theory is all gains and losses, and another way to think about his four human traits is total gain, loss/gain, gain/loss, and total loss.
And maybe that’s the real answer here. Maybe, we shouldn’t concern ourselves with why anti-vax/maskers act like they do. Perhaps, we should simply accept them as an incredible danger to our country, states, cities, friends, families, and selves, and we should just do everything we can to do more good than they do harm.
I like Cipolla’s theory, and I find it to be a compelling model for many of the problems we’re experiencing—like, for instance, Republicans.
In this writings, Cipolla makes a point of dividing bandits into Intelligent Bandits and Stupid Bandits. Intelligent bandits cause an equal amount of loss and gain, and they get everything they take from others. Stupid bandits cause more loss than gain, and they only get part of what they cause others to lose.
When I read that, I think about how Republicans are actively working to crash the US so they can keep their wealth and power. And then I think that they’re going so far with it that they may have moved from being stupid bandits to fully stupid because it’s irrational to think they’ll keep much of anything if the country collapses.
I also start thinking about how prevalent stupid banditry is in the world—as if it’s the only way to do business. The “bigs” are especially dangerous: big agriculture, apparel, chemical, electronics, oil, pharmaceuticals, retail, etc.
We’re all losing our lives in one way or another to these dubious ventures.
But that’s my mind drifting on to a topic for another diary, and I’ll stop this one here.
In his essay, Cipolla divides human beings into four categories and builds his theory on these characteristics.
His categories are:
- Intelligent People whose actions benefit others and themselves
- Helpless People whose actions harm them but benefit others
- Bandits whose actions harm others but benefit them
- Stupid People whose actions harm others but don’t benefit them and may, in fact, harm them, too
And he presents his theory as five laws:
- Everyone always underestimates how many stupid people there are.
- Stupidity is unrelated to any other human trait.
- Stupid people cause losses to others without gain and, possibly, with losses to themselves.
- Non-stupid people always underestimate how harmful stupid people are.
- Stupid people are the most dangerous type of person.
Taking Cipolla’s laws and looking for correlations with anti-vax/mask behavior, you can map out anti-vax/mask actions like this:
- How many: 30% of the US population is hesitating, resisting, or outright refusing to get a coronavirus vaccine.
- Unrelated to other traits: Health care workers are protesting against getting vaccinated.
- No gain and possible losses: Not even the threat of death is changing anti-vax/mask behavior.
- How harmful: Who would have predicted that Missouri would end up in such terrible condition?
- Most dangerous: Anti-vax/maskers are bringing the systems we rely on for our safety and health to the brink of crashing.
And you could do the same matching of Cipolla’s laws with anti-vax/mask actions, and together, we could come up with a big, five-part list of parallels between Cipolla’s theory and the anti-vax/mask movement.
And it would prove nothing.
But looking at it might make you wonder, like me, if there’s anything but dangerous, illogical, and incomprehensible behavior there.
Cipolla doesn’t explain stupid people. He simply says that they exist, and they’re irrational, unpredictable, and hazardous. He states that irrational people can’t be understood by rational minds and cautions against getting involved with irrational people because it always comes with a cost that’s often a big cost.
He says the only hope is for rational people to create more gains than the losses that irrational people cause. He was an economist so his theory is all gains and losses, and another way to think about his four human traits is total gain, loss/gain, gain/loss, and total loss.
And maybe that’s the real answer here. Maybe, we shouldn’t concern ourselves with why anti-vax/maskers act like they do. Perhaps, we should simply accept them as an incredible danger to our country, states, cities, friends, families, and selves, and we should just do everything we can to do more good than they do harm.
I like Cipolla’s theory, and I find it to be a compelling model for many of the problems we’re experiencing—like, for instance, Republicans.
In this writings, Cipolla makes a point of dividing bandits into Intelligent Bandits and Stupid Bandits. Intelligent bandits cause an equal amount of loss and gain, and they get everything they take from others. Stupid bandits cause more loss than gain, and they only get part of what they cause others to lose.
When I read that, I think about how Republicans are actively working to crash the US so they can keep their wealth and power. And then I think that they’re going so far with it that they may have moved from being stupid bandits to fully stupid because it’s irrational to think they’ll keep much of anything if the country collapses.
I also start thinking about how prevalent stupid banditry is in the world—as if it’s the only way to do business. The “bigs” are especially dangerous: big agriculture, apparel, chemical, electronics, oil, pharmaceuticals, retail, etc.
We’re all losing our lives in one way or another to these dubious ventures.
But that’s my mind drifting on to a topic for another diary, and I’ll stop this one here.
