Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Alan Klein]

Big boost for US car manufacturers and a great deal for US car buyers.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/tesla-gets-a-big-boost-in-washington-investors-dont-notice-51622149542?siteid=yhoof2

That will hurt assemblers in Canada where you live.  Frankly, it's a dumb idea when government picks winners and losers.  We never learn.

Manufacturers will keep prices higher than they would have knowing the buyers are getting some money back from the government.  Also, it takes taxes paid by poorer non-buyers to pay for cars richer people buy since the poor cannot afford to buy new cars.   How's that a good social or liberal policy?  Where's the fairness in that?  It will reduce the incentive somewhat to make better batteries and reduce the cost of manufacturing.  If the government provides no rebates, the car manufacturers will work overtime to lower EV costs.  It wastes taxes that we need for other things.  It's governmental deficit spending causes inflation and higher prices.  I think a lot of sales will go overseas despite the rebates because people buy for other reasons beside price.  It will distort the free market causing these unintended and consequences unknown at this time that's going to come back and kick us in the butt.

[Alan Klein]

One assertion that caught my attention recently was "people need the right to bare arms". Well, with the warmer weather, we will probably see a lot of that with sleeveless attire being seasonable once again.

If I have the energy and inclination sometime, I may write something on the Second Amendment "right to bear arms" and the repeated assertion that the "true purpose" was to give people or the states a way to protect themselves from a tyrannical federal government. Not in the mood to do so now as there's a far more complex and subtle history and context than any of those with extreme or rigid views on any side of the subject will acknowledge. Subtlety and complexity are the mortal enemies of rigid ideology.

Needless to say, but there are federal statutes to provide for punishing assault on a federal agent or official. Anyone owing allegiance to the United States engaged in or aiding an act of war, whether foreign or domestic, against the federal government is committing treason under the Constitution. Various states have their own laws to define and punish treason against the state government. In broad general terms, the Founders and Framers sought to guard against both tyranny and anarchy, in crafting a balanced framework for a well-regulated civil society to insure domestic tranquility—believing that the ability to lead a peaceful life, free from the fear of mob rule, was also an essential ingredient of liberty.

It isn't treason if the leadership is a tyranny and fails to follow the constitution.  Like what's happening right now in Myanmar. I don't know if their citizens have arms though? 

Whatever you call it is beside the point.  Obviously, if the citizenship is forced to used arms to regain their freedoms, that's war.  The citizens lifting up arms against the tyrant know what they're in for.  But then, the writers of our constitution did just that, commit treason, against the British Crown in our War for Independence a few years earlier.  Why would they give up the freedoms they fought for with arms and do away with those very arms afterwards?  No.  They knew that arms are the final solution if constitutional protection breaks down.  That's why we have a 2nd Amendment.

[Alan Klein]

Yes, but if you read Alan's post a couple before mine you would have seen that 1/4 of those on unemployment are making more then going back to work.  That alone shows that it is keeping people out of work. 

I'll say it again, poor people are poor due to bad decisions and too much government "help."  I went over this before, public a program like public housing destroyed the equity of the black community.  In the 1960s, black neighborhoods had a high rate of homeownership in many areas that neighboring white neighborhoods, even though the houses were worth less.  This is how it worked for many other ethnicities climbing up the ladder. 

In an effort to help out inner city blacks and minorities, because those houses just were not worth as much as others, the government created public housing that, taking equity away from homeowners on the plots were they built the housing.  They then put in rent control, making it impossible for owners to keep up with maintenance.  This then lowered the overall value of houses even more and drew crime into the area.  This did so much worse then what it did to help. 

We need to just leave people alone and let them figure it out.  We need to stop basing our policies off of the snap shot fallacy, and just leave them alone.  We need to stop intervening with how communities naturally develop. 

Alas though, I doubt this will even happen.  Too many people base their life meaning on being White Saviors and/or grifters trying to make a buck. I think Booker T Washington wrote it best in 1901, “There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”

What's interesting is that President Clinton, a Democrat, did welfare reform in the 1990s that eliminated much of it created years earlier that was causing huge problems in the poor communities, both black and white.  Welfare was perpetuating people living in poverty.  Which reminds me of the statement at the time by people who ran businesses supporting the welfare system: "There's lots of money to be made in poverty."   

Unfortunately, Clinton supported another program that encouraged mortgages to people who really couldn't afford homes.  No down payments were required and no checks on income.  It lead to the real estate debacle a few years later in 2008 when many poor people were wiped out and lost their homes.  Government and the do-gooders never learn.

[Peter McLennan]

Ohio lawmakers want to abolish vaccine requirements—all vaccine requirements

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/05/ohio-lawmakers-want-to-abolish-vaccine-requirements-all-vaccine-requirements/

Because muh freedoms!

[degrub]

Natural selection opportunity !

[Robert Roaldi]

Ohio lawmakers want to abolish vaccine requirements—all vaccine requirements

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/05/ohio-lawmakers-want-to-abolish-vaccine-requirements-all-vaccine-requirements/

Because muh freedoms!

I wish this was surprising but it seems to be more and more commonplace. This would not surprise Galileo though. 

Vaccines must be one of the great triumphs of science. We have figured out very successful ways to encourage the body to build up its own defences, but people reject vaccines for increasingly bizarre reasons, political virtue signalling being the most bizarre. Do the same people who reject vaccines also reject antibiotics, I wonder? Do they reject open heart surgery? Do they buy illegal recreational drugs from criminal gangs? It would be interesting to find out their other behaviours and compare.

[Peter McLennan]

Everybody knows that Bill Gates put tracking microchips in the vaccines.

[Robert Roaldi]

... It will distort the free market causing these unintended and consequences unknown at this time that's going to come back and kick us in the butt.

Did saving Chrysler and GM distort the market?

Did Trump's tariffs distort the market?

Does giving relocation advantages to Amazon distort the market?

Is there anywhere a "free market" in the sense that you understand it?

Competition is only a good thing in textbooks. In the real world, businesses hate it.

[digitaldog]

Everybody knows that Bill Gates put tracking microchips in the vaccines.

Right, because of course, you can't be tracked from your darn cell phone. 

[Alan Klein]

Did saving Chrysler and GM distort the market?

Did Trump's tariffs distort the market?

Does giving relocation advantages to Amazon distort the market?

Is there anywhere a "free market" in the sense that you understand it?

Competition is only a good thing in textbooks. In the real world, businesses hate it.

Giving rebates on Tesla cars is crony capitalism. It's making Musk richer. I wouldn't think that you would like that. I don't.

[LesPalenik]

That will hurt assemblers in Canada where you live.  Frankly, it's a dumb idea when government picks winners and losers.  We never learn.

Some would say that it's even dumber when the Americans send their money to the Far East car manufacturers.
What we can expect in the next year or two, is several new Tesla gigafactories, some in USA and another one in central Europe.

[LesPalenik]

Giving rebates on Tesla cars is crony capitalism. It's making Musk richer. I wouldn't think that you would like that. I don't.

Although Tesla and Musk will get the lion share of the US subsidies, the primary reason for the new rules was a transition from the dirty oil to the clean green energy. The savings in combating the environmental pollution and health fatalities should outweigh the subsidies.

[digitaldog]

Giving rebates on Tesla cars is crony capitalism.

But giving super rich tax breaks and upping the deficit, as your boy Trump did, that's OK. 

[Alan Klein]

But giving super rich tax breaks and upping the deficient, as your boy Trump did, that's OK. 

The poor aren't getting the tax breaks for Tesla cars.  It's bad when Biden did it and bad when Trump did it. Crony capitalism is bad regardless who does it.

[digitaldog]

The poor aren't getting the tax breaks for Tesla cars. 

No one said they did sir.
Actually the 'poor' who can afford a Tesla can get a tax break too. I doubt they are buying them and it's moot.
Of course, you failed to read or comprehend WHY there are tax breaks for these cars:

the primary reason for the new rules was a transition from the dirty oil to the clean green energy.

I got a state and fed tax break for purchasing a Solar tracker in 2012. And yes, it was an incentive. But of course you can't justify how the super rich got tax breaks AND at the same time, the US deficit ballooned in the process or how that is good for anyone BUT the super rich. And Trump.
Do attempt to pay attention before posting again.

[Alan Klein]

Although Tesla and Musk will get the lion share of the US subsidies, the primary reason for the new rules was a transition from the dirty oil to the clean green energy. The savings in combating the environmental pollution and health fatalities should outweigh the subsidies.

If America stopped all carbon emissions, it wouldn't change anything regarding the climate without China and India.  This is just a subsidy that mainly goes to more well-heeled and rich people at the expense of the middle class and poor.  It will have no dent on climate.  Biden's new budget will make Canadians as well as Americans poorer. It's taking assets that could have been spent elsewhere to help let's say the homeless rather than giving to the rich who could afford these cars and would buy them anyway.  Didn't we learn anything from Solyndra?

If they want to do something worthwhile, they should give 5 rolls of Kodak film free to all film photographers. 

[digitaldog]

If America stopped all carbon emissions, it wouldn't change anything regarding the climate without China and India. 

Missing the point again. If we stopped all carbon emissions, it would do the entire planet a lot of good and maybe other's would follow.
It's a bit like someone stopping from stating incorrectly "All prints are 300DPI". Others who know even a bit less than that author would not read and believe such nonsense from that producer of misinformation, even if others kept up that silly, nonsensical statement. Baby steps but progress.
Obviously the concept of leading by example is lost on some here.

[digitaldog]

If they want to do something worthwhile, they should give 5 rolls of Kodak film free to all film photographers.

But would you qualify? 🤔
Seems you 'think' subsidizing Kodak isn't "Crony capitalism."

[Alan Klein]

No one said the did sir.
Actually the 'poor' who can afford a Tesla can get a tax break too. I doubt they are buying them and it's moot.
Of course, you failed to read or comprehend WHY there are tax breaks for these cars:I got a state and fed tax break for purchasing a Solar tracker in 2012. And yes, it was an incentive. But of course you can't justify how the super rich got tax breaks AND at the same time, the US deficient ballooned in the process or how that is good for anyone BUT the super rich. And Trump.
Do attempt to pay attention before posting again.

You need to pay attention to my posts.  You are not reading them.  I've said over and over that I don't agree with subsidies for the rich.  Why do you keep repeating that I do?  I'm against crony capitalism. I'm against deficit spending and printing that Trump and other politicians are for.   However, I think Biden will be worse for the economy. I believe Trump lost the election. I believe the government should stay out of business affairs except for providing a fair playing field and protecting people's property from theft and crime.  I believe in low taxes as the country does better economically that way.  I believe in progressive taxes which we have although a flat tax may be better and simpler.  I'm against printing to support deficit spending. I'm against subsidies for certain products and feel free markets are better at determining the best way to go.  Government should get out of picking winners and losers. 

[digitaldog]

You need to pay attention to my posts.  You are not reading them. 

I am, they are as usual, nonessential, based on assumptions and misunderstandings. Like "All prints are 300DPI"; I read your post. 

However, I think Biden will be worse for the economy.

Have you used Trump's previous barometer for the economy, the stock market?

Government should get out of picking winners and losers.

But you'll gladly accept that social security check they send you.