Land of Bribes & Tribes

Foreign Policy, Travel, Tech, & Firearms

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

The ongoing and accelerating collapse of the American middle class is going to be terrible for American workers and their families, certainly; but it is arguably going to be just as bad for American employers. Employers who rely on a clientele made up of paying customers, on a recurring and volume basis, can hope for diminishing returns coupled with increased taxes paying for wasteful social programs that do nothing to stimulate the economy in perpetuity - unless they can get ahead of the loss by investing in automation themselves.

A capitalist economy based on the human allocation of resources through the trading of goods and services is doomed by these trends - as is the personal liberty of individuals damned to a new and crushing form of useless serfdom (there isnt much freedom when you have nothing but debt and have no economic value to even be exploited)… but there is a solution:

A “Citizens Dividend” (as named by Thomas Paine in 1797) - The idea that the goods and services that citizens invest in their national economic growth should provide returns similar to the way that such an action provides returns in the Market.

You could also call it “helicopter money” - or direct to the citizen “quantitative easing”. I like to call it “Capillary Economics”. This idea isn’t new and it isn’t particularly divisive - any more than public education is divisive - but it isn’t well understood. It would help to link the citizen to the national economic well being and ensure that people continue to do what they are best at even when the value of their labor drops to zero: to consume and determine the ideal allocation of resources by their economic activity.

Something to consider as your job prospects shrivel away to nothing and the people you know with money retire and are not replaced because a computer does it better. An idea that serves as a flashlight in the darkness.

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

It's terrible, but the fraud is based on the buyer having the car repossessed and reselling the vehicle rapidly. It is built into the system and desired; and because the overhead related to the repo isn't that high, it is nothing like trying to hold onto property, and pay taxes (which drains money rapidly and turn around is low and expensive). So, no - it isn't like the subprime mortgage issue. It is legal predatory lending - that and loan sharking have been profitable for a log time. Housing lenders tried to get in on the action and failed spectacularly.

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

What Does The Word Compromise Really Mean?

Here is a very primitive view of politics on a single issue from my perspective: Gun issues are generally not very popular. When people aren’t paying much attention, gun rights groups make big gains because they have a passionate and large base of supporters.

Years of Democratic outreach into blue-collar States have neglected the issue and made gun rights less contentious. The DNC was focused on winning and went with the low hanging fruit issues that worked for them. As the DNC has had success with their other issues over the past 15 years and truly believed that the GOP coalition was in terminal decline, they turned their attention to guns and lost harder than many expected. They miscalculated the strength of the gun lobby and came after them as though they were victorious in an endgame battle; as though forcing them to accept expanded background checks in exchange for their political lives WAS the compromise. The midterms proved that calculus disastrously wrong for their hold over the Senate.

Here is where the future is unclear; the plurality of people like to back a winner. Every time the Democratic party loses, they get angrier and focus on the issue more and more. In this situation they keep losing and keep getting angrier. On the one hand, more exposure of the issue makes gains harder for the gun rights side, but it also becomes more firmly engrained in the GOP’s party platform because it cements their constituency with passionate actors and nets them votes.

The President takes a frustrating losing issue personally because he is a winner. All he needs is one big win to halt the march of gun rights and turn the tables. He believes that he can do it with minimal risk to himself in his last year in office, but I’m not sure he is concerned about the party. What he is hoping for is for his executive actions to artificially be considered a “win” and get the momentum on his side for more wins down the road. He is buffeted by the expectation that presidential year result will be much more favorable for the Democrats than the midterms, which is the popular wisdom, but the actual margins are important; Clinton is no Barack Obama.

His supporters consistently argue that all this is about is background checks. It, of course, is not - but the arguement from the Democrats suggests that once we compromise and let this simple thing through in exchange for nothing that the issue will die down and we can get back to winning on the issue.

I don’t believe this. A victory on this issue begets more victories for the opposition, unless neutralized by a true compromise that moves both balls forward; a mild irritant for all involved. Its probably true that issue exposure is a net negative (for everything other than concealed carry), but the greater risk is the DNC getting a win and getting a taste for the issue. Until they are actually discussing a compromise (one where both party interests are moved forward incrementally) we should hold the line and wait to pass a true compromise bill when/if we secure the executive. The ball will be moved forward and people who have a more vested interest in the mechanism of gun laws will have a say in the resolution. Nobody benefits more from a drop in gun homicides than the gun lobby. Not only do they not want people to be killed, but they benefit politically from lowering trends in this area. I don’t trust an opponent that benefits politically from body counts and human suffering.

When they are finally ready for compromise, we will been waiting.

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

Which of the individual countries in the chart would you guess contains approximately 50% of all civilian owned firearms in the world?

Gun control advocates are right in that limiting ease of access seems to do something (although nothing close to what they suggest it does). The Brady Bill had some major negatives, but the NICS check was a positive. I believe that denying this is damaging to our cause - I encourage the NRA to play hardball (for strategic reasons), but I won’t say something that I don’t believe to be true.

I wish that the narrative could be reframed: gun owners benefit from having access to a federal check that can be done, for a fee, before selling a weapon to someone. It is confusing as to why this is so difficult. The internet would allow checks to be done and verified before a sale ever took place. Even barring a law mandating this, I would use it anytime that I sold a weapon. (leaving aside the fact that I live in NY with new laws that require me to anyway)

Regarding limiting weapons/ammo. This is unconstitutional. The core of the Second Amendment, which even most gun controllers seem to acknowledge, is an individual right, summarized in the prefatory clause; “a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”. Not hunting, not defending yourself from an intruder. The arms that they are attempting to ban are the most appropriate for the security of a free state AND are involved in a tiny fraction of all crimes. You can regulate a car to ensure that it drives well, but taking the wheels off and the engine out pretty clearly doesn’t regulate it with that end in mind

In fact, the use of the arms in the way that mass shooters have used them would be best remedied by a few armed, trained, and even permitted if you’d like - concealed carriers. Here, background checks will do very little, as is evident from most of the previous attacks where checks were passed or crimes were committed for procurement.

It’s a tougher argument to suggest that being held up at gunpoint is likely to resolve itself more favorably if the victim has a gun. The skill required to not be shot and killed is beyond me, at least. But in a room full of many people being shot like sitting ducks, by a person with a rifle - the concealed carrier actually has an advantage; individual or a few targets and laser focused attention to that perpetrator. The killer HAD the advantage of surprise, but that has expired, and would then need to ensure cover so that he didn’t bleed out and could keep on shooting

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

"An overly excited government official blurted that a local firm was super excited after “winning the contract for China’s second aircraft carrier.”

Shortly after realizing that this was technically “secret” information, authorities quickly tried to yank the story from news, social media, and other sites. Of course, the officials weren’t quite fast enough to prevent people from noticing and getting all wound up.“

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

“I think allies, partners, and friends in the region will look to the Japanese more and more as a stabilizing function,” Admiral Thomas told Reuters. ”In the South China Sea, frankly, the Chinese fishing fleet, the Chinese coastguard and the [navy] overmatch their neighbors,” he added. ”I think that JSDF operations in the South China Sea makes sense in the future.”

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

There is a difference between a right to something and a right to force someone else to pay for that thing. I believe that people, collectively, have a right to set up their own networks in a private or public capacity. If there are laws that bar this, those laws are unacceptable - should they also be unconstitutional? Are they already?

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

Convert your Remington 700 into a detachable mag bolt action and new Glock PMags - from Magpul 2015 Shot Show

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

"Most important by far: you care about the success of others more than you care about your own success. Everyone around you needs to ultimately become better than you. That’s how you lead. The light is in front of you and you take them to the light and then go back. If all the people around you achieve more than you, then life will be good. You don’t have to believe me. I’ve seen this happen repeatedly."

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

Interesting new system. There are a lot of features that should be intuitive with the AR platform, but just aren’t.

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

I’ve been a stalwart believer that States and the laws that govern their citizens will become largely optional in the near future. If I don’t like American tax law, I could always move - now, I may not have to; if I run an online business for starters. The world that they once forced on you has become optional.

"For I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” -Thomas Jefferson

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

"Milwaukee resident and concealed carry permit holder Nazir Al-Mujaahid discusses the night he foiled a robbery at an Aldi grocery store on Feb. 3, 2012 — the first known CCW incident following the enactment of Wisconsin’s concealed carry licensing law on Nov. 1, 2011." The felon was released on probation before the lawful shooter received his firearm back

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

I believe, as this author does, that some form of armed conflict between Russia and the West is becoming a likelihood. What do I know?

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

What a beautiful video by IV8888. As always, the favorites are the GI mag, PMag, and Hex mag.

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

Travis Haley helps you build firearms into your morning exercise routine

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

"Call it China’s “alternative diplomacy.” Xi’s strategy is a sophisticated and progressive one. Instead of directly challenging the current existing international institutions, the Chinese are trying to create new platforms that Beijing can control or substantially influence. Through these new initiatives, Beijing aims to create a new international environment that is more favorable to China, one that will limit strategic pressures from the United States."

[tuffstuffmcgruff]

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations." - George Orwell