Rich Guys

I recently saw a list of the eight wealthiest men in the world. They limited the list to eight because those eight guys actually possess one-half (1/2)—50%--fifty percent—yup, half of the entire world’s wealth.  Let me say that again so it sinks in: EIGHT men control half of the entire world’s wealth.

Talk about your filthy, stinking, greedy, sonofabitching one percent!

No surprise that six of the eight are United States citizens, what with us having unfairly raped and pillaged a 4,000-year-old system of civilization in just the last 200 years by designing that most evil of evil economic and social systems: capitalism. (Hissssss.)

So this might surprise you a little bit as your hatred for the 1% festers like a boil: all six Americans are democrats. Yup. Six of the eight richest guys on the planet are US of A democrats.  Flaming ones, actually.

Bill Gates, of course, tops the list, followed by Amancio Ortega—a Spaniard—who owns a 7,000 store international retail fashion chain. Warren Buffet comes in third just ahead of Carlos Slim Helu—a Mexican who made his fortune in telecommunications and maybe drug trafficking, but mostly telecommunications. In the Mexican press they like to drop his last name and just call him Carlos Slim. Three years ago he was the richest man in the world but then the U.S. started legalizing marijuana and the telecommunications industry took a downturn. (What?)

Rounding out the list are all a bunch of happy, smiling, American democrats. Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon, who is a huge contributor to the democratic party but an outspoken opponent of laying more of a tax burden on the rich. Hmmm. More on that later.

Michael Bloomberg is sixth. He created a huge financial information provider after an investment bank fired him. His main clients all have Wall Street addresses. No one seems to mind that he retains an 89% stake in his privately held company while he discharges his duties as mayor of New York. Weird.

Then comes Larry Ellison, founder of Oracle. I couldn’t find much information on Larry other than he is indeed a registered and heavily contributing democrat.  Maybe not so oddly, his first and still largest client is the CIA. Shhhhh.

And at number eight with a paltry $44.6 billion is my personal favorite rich guy, that flaming pussy and guardian of the truth and only information he likes, Mark Zuckerberg. Everyone probably knows Mark founded Facebook, to which most of us are addicted. Mark would be the richest guy in the world but he sold 50% of his holdings in Facebook and put it all in a foundation dedicated to philanthropic causes.  So far most of that money is still in his foundation. I wonder if the DNC is on his list of philanthropic causes?

I don’t know about the rest of you but my head is fairly reeling from the cognitive dissonance of this information. I thought all those evil, rich corporate barbarians dedicated to keeping poor people poor were filthy conservative bastards. I thought the 1% was made up of old fat white republicans sitting around their country clubs plotting ways to discriminate and suppress populations and not share their ill-gotten fortunes.

Could it be that the richest men in America, nay, the world, and the biggest political contributors in our society have a vested interest in a system that the left professes to hate and wants to bring crashing to the ground in flames? Could it be they’ve been lying to us all along about whose interest they have at heart and that they actually need the wheels of capitalism to continue to turn in their direction? Is it possible they’ve been perpetuating a collection of “victim” coalitions to keep their own interests at the top of the pyramid?

Say it isn’t so Dick Cheney? What’s up Donald? What about the evil Koch Brothers?

Here’s some consolation for the left: together the combined fortunes of the Koch brothers make the two of them the richest man in the world but even in American journalism you can’t claim two men are one guy. At $80 billion they would edge out Gates if you can consider a $5 billion margin an edge. They own a $20 million home in Aspen but don’t be impressed, $20 million just won’t but what it used to in Aspen. They also own a 10,000 sf home in New York and the wing with the pool alone is supposed to be worth $25 million. Now you can be impressed.

So if none of my boyhood heroes sit atop the list of 1%ers I am a little pissed. All this time I’ve been taking crap from the left about how the evil rich republicans are the problem and come to find out the biggest evil rich guys are actually lefties. Go figure.

It’s the fella’s who pull the strings on the left who are benefitting the most from our oppressive economic and social system. I’m sure they don’t want to. I can remember Warren Buffet being upset that his secretary paid more in taxes than he did. I never did here if he wrote a check for a few billion to the feds to make up for it.

He was probably too busy protecting Berkshire Hathaway’s investment in rail transportation systems whose value is severely threatened by the prospect of much safer and less hazardous oil and gas pipelines. Ah, probably not.

And what’s with this Bezos guy not being down with raising taxes on the rich? The left and their media tell us that merely requiring the rich to pay their fair share would solve our problems. I can’t find the stat I saw recently that showed if you confiscated ALL of the assets of the 1% and dumped it in the federal treasury it would only keep the government afloat for an alarmingly short time period.  Zuckerberg probably knocked that link down cuz it was fake news. Or maybe just something that didn’t contribute to his leftist agenda, to which he remains committed because the results of convincing a nation rich republicans suck hasn’t been bad for him.

Post Inaugural Thoughts (I didn't want to do it.)

So the left kind of took whining and moping a little further than I had forecast but was anyone really surprised to see them running down streets smashing windows of cars and businesses after the inauguration?

                At least they wore black masks because that’s what people of conviction who know they’re right do, I guess.

                A word of caution, though. They weren’t all rioting or cozened away in closets weeping and modeling Play-Doh, or lying on the floor of your local supermarket kicking their heels and flailing their arms in the biggest national temper tantrum this country may have ever seen. Some of them were quietly licking their wounds in the privacy of their own living rooms. Or maybe not so quietly, but at least in the privacy of their own living rooms. Kind or like the right did for the most part in 2012.

                Whether you can understand how they draw a single conclusion that they subscribe to or not, they still have a right to disagree with you. That is what this is democratic process is all about, right?.  And President Trump is going to work hard to win the right an opportunity to disagree with the left, I hear.

They don’t understand why we don’t believe abortion (which has been protected by law since 1973) is in imminent danger of disappearing; that we will round up all the Latinos and ship them back to Mexico and points south (remember they take him completely literally and not a bit seriously); that the LGBT will have to become an underground organization that can only meet in mosque basements—oh wait, probably not there; that Donald Trump will create too many jobs in America and then what are all the underdeveloped nation’s workers supposed to do (yup, heard that one this week); that Trump is “Hitleriean,” (so they still don’t get that the Nazi’s were socialists, that like Obama Hitler also hated Jews, that gun control was critical to his ability to hold power and that he used racial division to galvanize his power base).

                Maybe I could believe Trump benefitted from racial division that galvanized a power base but I can’t fathom they think he created the situation in less than a year when eight years of Obama’s racial hate speech had nothing to do with it.

                The point is that on their planet, which incredibly is also our planet, the left thinks the right is as completely screwed up as we think they are. No really. They do think that.

                And wouldn’t it be nice if we could all find some common ground to advance the great cause that is America? But that very thing is what I think they are calling “Hitlerian” which once again has me admitting I don’t really understand what they want.

                I do not envy Donald Trump in his objective to unite America. I’m not sure the left can ever be made happy but I will be the first to admit that I do not share their world view on hardly anything (thank God). And, honestly, I don’t think they want to be united.  And I don’t think the media would let it happen, but you already know what I think of those bottom-feeding creatures of the dark.

                This morning, reading the opposition newsletter that passes for our local paper—you probably get one too if you haven’t decided it’s too filthy to have in the same house as your children—I read an editorial-as-news piece of propaganda by The Washington Post (The Denver Post has its own reporters--some  kids named Noelle and Danika and Jesse who try to write big person stories but they apparently all want to work for the Associated Press one day instead).

                The WP described (without attribution, of course) Trump’s Inaugural Acceptance Speech as “combative” and “an ominous portrait of the nation,” “dark.”  In Margaret Taley’s opinion (one can only assume she fancies herself a reporter) Trump’s message made “little effort to reach beyond his political base or reassure foreign leaders.”

                In contrast the coverage I watched on Fox News described it as the most uplifting speech in recent inaugural history. That a reason for hope has been extended to middle class families who felt entirely disenfranchised by the Obama regime; jobs are coming back to the rust belt; the oil and gas industry can expect a recovery; Trump intends to focus much of his job creation effort (as opposed to more welfare) on helping inner city youths find legal and productive work; that our streets will once again become safe to walk without fear of getting caught in the crossfire of a gangland shooting.

                And that the guiding principles in all decisions and policies will be America and American citizens which seems like something a US President shouldn’t have to reassure folks of but here we are.  And the fact he wants to do that actually upsets the left.  No, I’m serious. In their living rooms that’s “Hitlerian.”

So the above paragraphs paint a pretty stark contrast, yes? If nothing else it would be swell if both sides agreed to disagree on whether or not the glass is half full instead of trying to bend each other to our respective wills, bayonet the wounded and take no prisoners.  Aaaargghhh.

I’m not trying to say we should all hold hands and sing Kumbayah. Ick. Make sure you know who you’re talking to but it’s ok to talk to each other about how goofy the other side is. I do not hate most of them. But I do hate a lot of them. Hate is such a horrible word and it really offends the more sensitive liberals which makes me wonder what they call it when their side murders police officers, beats people for wearing “Make America Great Again” clothing, burns the American Flag, takes a knee at football games or says some of the incredibly hateful, blasphemous things they say when given a microphone.

                In his book “Left Turn,” Glen Grossclose, a Stanford researcher and economics professor (at least when he wrote the book), describes all political thought as circular. In other words, we tend to read and watch sources that reinforce our political views.  We tend to hang out with and talk to people who reinforce our political views (take the state of California for example). We inevitably continue to reach the same conclusions we have always reached because our world view is a pretty fundamental part of who we are and limited exposure to theories or even evidence to the contrary are not likely to change either side’s minds.

                Talk about dark and hopeless. Unless maybe you woke up this morning seeing the glass as half full with a pitcher of ice water right beside it.  Sorry for those of you who want to hang yourselves.

                By the way, those polls that had Donald Trump’s preinauguration approval ratings running at 40-44%? I admittedly was unable to find the info I wanted on The Gallup Survey sample group but in CNN’s and ABC’s the sample group included 24% and 23% Republicans respectively. Seems a little skewed.

                No matter how far left you are, how do you continue to believe a media that 2/3’s of America professes to distrust and disbelieve with seriously good reason?

Inaugaral Thoughts

So next Friday Donald Trump gets sworn in as president, barring the unforeseen, and an era of reversing what many of us felt was wrongly perpetrated upon this country hopefully begins.

Hopefully.

            Is Trump the guy to heal Obama’s racial division of our country? It would seem Rep. John Lewis (whoever the heck he is) thinks not but he’s also a big fan of a picture depicting cops as pigs in the capitol building that is coming down on Tuesday so I don’t really care what he thinks. I think it is going to take years and years to undo the racist hatred Obama fostered in this country and get us back to where we were; far from perfect but at least headed in the right direction. I don’t know that Trump or any man can fix what is currently broken by himself.  I still subscribe to the theory that black leadership is going to have to step up and fix the black family rather than continue to promote a concept of victimization to keep their power base helpless. Neither Donald nor I can do much about that. Take a knee, I guess.

         Is Trump the guy to fix the economy? Well, I think a number of us think that’s the case. And for a guy who is hated by the liberal media he has sure been getting a heck of a lot of press about all the jobs he’s already created that, according to the Associated Press, don’t matter because Obama didn’t create them. He won’t even be president ‘til Friday afternoon. It should be interesting to see what happens when he actually has some power.
 
          Will he build the dreaded wall that has the left so upset? Former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm observed after the election that those on the left took Trump literally but not seriously and those who supported him took him seriously but not literally. I think that is the most profound observation of where Trump’s support came from so far, although I have little hope the left is ever going to quit crying long enough to get it.

          We don’t care if he builds an actual brick wall on our border with Mexico.  We don’t care if he just draws a line in the sand, although I think it may be something more substantial than that. We care about our border security even if the left is foolish enough not to. We simply want existing immigration laws enforced.

And yup, call us whatever phobe is appropriate: until we have a reliable vetting system in place we might want to slow down turning our streets into the streets of France and Germany by pell mell letting in a bunch of barely vetted young men between the ages of 18 and 35 from a region of the world that prides itself on killing unarmed, innocent women and children because Allah is such a bad ass.

          Absolutely most Muslims are peaceful, loving people. Don’t even start. But I subscribe to what Brigitte Gabriel, the reporter who was born and raised in Lebanon and actually knows what she’s talking about has to say: Not all Germans were Nazis in the 30’s and 40’s either. Applying percentages Ms. Gabriel has allegedly gleaned from Middle Eastern, European and American intelligence communities as well as her own life experience she would be the first to tell you 1,260,000,000 Muslims are peaceful, loving souls.  That only leaves 240,000,000 you need to worry about.

Is Trump the guy to reestablish America as the preeminent superpower in the world? Well, I’ll sure sleep better at night if he is. I don’t want it to be Russia or China. Or Iran. In spite of the left’s belief that our new president swaps spit with Vlad Putin, I kind of think Russia would have preferred the U.S. keep leading the way on disarmament and a downsized military and a policy of cowtowing to whomever growls at us than what they may get with President Trump. But until James Comey steps up and admits HE cost Hillary her election we have to blame somebody.

I can only hope I’m right. If not, you may hold me personally responsible if I can hold any lefty pointing their finger at me responsible for #onlyblacklivesmatter and maybe a few other things.

Is Trump the guy to make our city streets safe again? Well, mine are fine. But as an American I wish Chicago and some other sanctuary cities with restrictive gun laws were a little safer. I hope he puts some teeth back in law enforcement’s ability to enforce the law.  The Broken Windows Policy of stop and frisk may have seemed discriminatory because of the demographic makeup of high crime neighborhoods but it without question worked. And the people who never get to talk in the microphone in those neighborhoods all must agree, in my opinion.

And we could go down the list and do this all day save for my commitment to try and keep these ramblings close to 1000 words. Please don’t be upset if I haven’t touched on your issue or if I left out any argument you’d like to have seen made or that you think I couldn’t dispute.  I really might not have been able to dispute it, after all.  Me and the guy who picks up your recycle agree but we’re hardly hallowed AP reporters (my tongue is so firmly in my cheek I think I bruised it).

On Friday it’s going to happen. An electoral bunch of us are going to rejoice, at least for awhile. Those of you on the West Coast and in the Northeast are going to mourn, moan and mope anew. And even though President Trump has an aggressive first day planned I’ll bet you on Saturday women will still have rights (voting, driving, not wearing burkahs, getting abortions, etc.), gays will still be able to get married, Muslims will be free to worship, no illegals or poor people will be without healthcare, no black people will have been rounded up by the national guard and executed in town square for the crime of being black, your grandma will still get her social security check and none of us will be forced to learn to speak Russian. Merry Christmas.

And no matter what Meryl Streep or Robert DeNiro or Alec Baldwin (he’s still alive, right?) want to lecture us on or threaten or refuse to do or whatever, Donald Trump will still be president. And on Friday night if I feel like buying a movie ticket and letting them entertain me I might. Otherwise I’m more interested in what the recycle guy has to say.

To be or not to be. Sensible.

                Some things just seem counterintuitive to me and while I feel like I try to keep an open mind you won’t find a lot of people accusing me of having one. Open or otherwise.

                I’ve been trying to do a little research on California SB 1322 decriminalizing prostitution among minors because at first glance I was flabbergasted that anyone could even think that was a good idea and I pretty much believe all evil in the world originates in California (not really, c’mon). Turns out 19 other states plus the District of Columbia already have some sort of law on the books decriminalizing to various extents prostitution among minors and my home state of Colorado is considering similar legislation.

                My initial thought (and I hope yours) is that making prostitution legal for minors is just a really bad idea. But it seems the other side is not motivated by evil intentions and what they think they are doing is protecting minors rather than criminalizing them.

                Who can’t get behind that?

                A quick trip to the FAQ page of the Shared Hope website (one of many organizations dedicated to ending human trafficking) reveals that their belief is that decriminalization of juvenile prostitution is principally necessary because “being arrested for prostitution is stigmatizing and re-traumatizing.”

                That’s the reason? Because whatever set of circumstances brought young girls, boys and members of the LGBT community to prostitution were only “traumatizing.” To add stigmatization and “re-traumatizing” to that is just too much to heap on a child? (I know, I thought we were mostly talking about young girls too and I don’t know how being LGBT makes one neither but look what I learned at Shared Hope.) 

                   You can do better than that. And they do elsewhere on the website. I was so fascinated with the idea that the most populated state in the country could think legalizing child prostitution was a good idea that I kept digging and these folks really are well-intentioned. Their fervent desire is to protect these youths rather than prosecute them. But nowhere did I find mention that a felony conviction for prostitution is possible for a minor or would follow them around as part of their permanent record foiling opportunities for gainful employment or subsidized housing. If that is the issue in decriminalization somebody should make that clear. It would change everything.

                Like many good intentions though, the plan seems to run out of ammo (bad word for a discussion of California?) immediately after the mission statement.

                I am pretty sure most thinking people realize the child prostitutes are not the real criminals or the real evil in the equation. We even realize most 13-year-old girls would not pick prostitution as a career choice under any reasonable circumstance.

                I can’t decide who disgusts me more, the johns who are willing to pay for underage sex or the monsters who pimp them or the horrible parents who created them.

                So far I think everybody is on the same side, right?

                Where it begins to not make sense to me (but I am admittedly common) is in preventing law enforcement from interfering with underage prostitutes, thereby allowing uninterrupted commerce for those who are profiting from their exploitation. I don’t know if pimps consciously use business models or not but if I were a pimp I would suddenly have little or no use for prostitutes over the age of 17. Too much risk of cash flow interruption.

                At least if we arrest them we are getting them off the street and giving a dedicated group of people—volunteer groups for the most part—an opportunity to try and help these kids turn their lives around. Were we really sending 13-year-old girls to prison on prostitution charges anyway? I mean, other than the stigmatizing and re-traumatization, wasn’t there really more help than punishment available to those kids? Maybe in future versions of 1322 we should use the word “rescue” instead of “arrest” when talking about juvenile prostitutes.

                The rate of recidivism is sky high, I know. But it’s not 100%. Some kids are being saved and God bless the volunteers who are dedicated to saving them. And maybe there is a better way. I wish I knew for sure. The abuse and neglect and social issues that go into finding oneself homeless as a minor and having to sell one’s body to survive or feed an addiction or get more attention from a pimp than a kid got from their parents is way beyond my pay grade (more than 50K per year but I did vote for Trump).

It makes me cry and I wish I knew the ultimate solution but I don’t think removing law enforcement from the picture is the answer. It’s a matter of perspective. Enforcement of the law shouldn’t be punishing children for being used as cash machines. Enforcement of the law in this case is removing the prize from the sick folks (pretty subtle play on words, yes?) who need to pay for sex with kids and the even sicker animals who profit from it. That’s all.

And that’s all that makes sense to me. I believe the proponents of 1322 are well-intentioned people who want to help. But like parents who think every child deserves a participation trophy their intentions have misfired with a solution that not only makes the initial problem worse, it creates a slew of new ones.

I realize extrapolation is not always fair and it often amounts to putting words in someone else’s mouth but imagine if we decriminalized all crime for juveniles.  Again, I don’t know which criminals actually paid attention in class and know what a business model is, but if we did that it wouldn’t be long until there were armies of juveniles running drugs, guns, thefts, murders, etc. while the dudes over 18 sat back and counted the cash. Obviously a whole lot of that goes on already, but imagine if we pulled cops out of the enforcement of any crime that involved a minor. Oversimplification for sure, but I’m trying to illustrate what a wrong turn I think we take when we make it legal, or to put it the way the do-gooders would, when we make it not illegal for children to sell their bodies for money.

I’m exhausted and my heart is heavy. Being open-minded is hard on me. And I’m still flabbergasted that anyone, let alone a supermajority of even the California Senate, could think decriminalizing child prostitution is a good idea.

What is wrong with this world?