Fundamental Things

New story 5-28-21

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Mon, 31 May 2021 00:51:00 +0000

https://cheekyhistory.substack.com/p/chris-and-the-pineapple-pretenders

Substack Subscription

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Mon, 05 Apr 2021 16:01:00 +0000

Editors note:

All future articles will be published at Substack. Please follow the link and subscribe to receive the posts by email. They can also be viewed on the Substack site.

This is not to be confused with subscriptions you may have already set up for the CHEEKY HISTORY newsletter. Many of you have already subscribed to that publication. We thank you very much.

At this time both subscriptions are offered at no charge. Premium subscriptions may be offered in the future.

Please use this link to subscribe to Fundamental Things.

Thanks for reading.

Something new

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:49:00 +0000

Some of you may know that I have been looking for a way out of Google. As a start, I have almost totally stopped using their Gmail client.

But my biggest issue is getting away from Google Blogger. That is where this blog is hosted. And I have to finally admit that my content does not actually belong to me because Google can cancel me at anytime for any reason or no reason. I would lose all my writing over the last ten years. (Some might not consider that a loss.)

So I am settling on Substack as the best place to publish going forward. I'm just setting it up so it's not ready for primetime yet.

Anyone who would like to be a Guinea pig to help me out a bit please leave a comment below or send me a message and I will put your name on a temporary list to get just a few emails with test posts and the like. You can give me feedback on the site or format if you want. You can also familiarize yourself with Substack. I think this concept is on the cutting edge of the future of publishing in this new world.

Thanks to those who bear with me while I make the transition.

Grant

Gotcha!

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:12:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

They fell for the trap!

In order to convince the population that the country is in great danger of being taken over by violent right wing extremists the government built a wall to keep the domestic terrorists out of the protected zone around the government buildings.

Those on the right have complained about the razor wire and army presence. That's because they are just a bunch of outsiders with no real knowledge of the plan. They just don't get it.

They didn't realize the fundamental fact that walls work both ways. They keep people out and they keep people in. The Great Wall of China was built to keep invaders out. The wall in East Germany was built to keep people in. Prisons keep people in too.

In one of the greatest roundups of all times we have been able to trick huge numbers of criminals into voluntarily reporting to prison. Now all we have to do is lock the gates behind them and end one of the biggest criminal conspiracies of all time.

435 Representatives, 50 Senators, and uncountable numbers of co-conspirators in the executive branch all captured at the same time. The masterminds have been brought to justice.

Quick! Lock the gates! Make America great again!

Women's Sports in the New World

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:49:00 +0000

America has changed.

A new executive order from the people who handle Joe Biden asserts that people who compete in girls' sports can be of any biological gender. 

It's not a suggestion. As the name clearly indicates, it's an order. By the executive.

If biological males say they "identify" as a female they will be allowed to compete with females in sporting events and contests.

I don't need to go into why this is a huge problem for our girls. Whoever doesn't think it's a problem has already stopped reading. If they ever started.

I have some suggestions for any girl, and her parents, if they are ever forced to compete in women's sports against biological males.

Please don't refuse to join the team. That is surrender. Only refuse to participate in the contests. Do it at the starting line or as the contests are just beginning. Just sit down or stand still on the field of play. Ask the other girls to join you in the protest. Imagine what it would look like if the only people running the race after the gun sounds are the "I identify" females. Let them have their "prize."

You can organize your fellow competitors to have a contest later, privately, without "official" approval. Away from schools. Away from politicians. Parents should support them and help them organize away from "authorities." Kids sports need not be tied to schools or other official organizations.

Every girl who does this might be kicked off the team. It's courage to stand up for yourself when you know you might be canceled. My opinion is formed as a parent and as a grandparent. I love brave girls. I have a whole family full of them.

You have a right to fight back for yourself or your daughter. You have a right to refuse to cooperate with this insanity. You have a right to peaceably resist. You need not cooperate. It's a fundamental human right. 

This article is not a debate over sexuality.

That's my opinion. Others may differ.

Hopium Revisited

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 18:53:00 +0000

As it turns out, the Biden presidency is cause for hope after all. What am I hoping for? I'm hoping for GOP support for the new impeachment trial of former President Trump.

The idea that Mitch McConnell and other Republican senators may support the removal from office of a president who is no longer in office is a welcome prospect.

You might ask why. It's simple.

Hopefully it will cause the effective end of the GOP. With any luck a large and important portion of the current GOP will leave that party and become independents, or even start a new political party. So, Mitch, GO FOR IT! Please.

The GOP has proved to be useless in opposing the advance of socialism and fascism. It is also useless in defending the rights of the people. And politically it is a dismal failure at its only real task. Namely, to get people elected. It couldn't even reelect its incumbent presidential candidate when running against a senile old man who never left his basement and could not speak coherently without reading prepared propaganda on a teleprompter. Even his voters knew that he wasn't up to actually making decisions and governing.

Ex-President Trump is gone, politically speaking. He will never rise again, in my opinion. So I'm not anticipating a new "personality cult" political party of his design to become a reality. 

I’m guessing this hope won’t play well with friends of mine who are Republicans or Trump supporters. It won't play well with those who think the Republicans are the opposite of Democrats. It won't play well with "never Trumpers." It won't play well with Pelosi haters. It certainly won't play well with Democrats who would no longer have a foil to work against in their successful efforts to keep Americans divided. And very few will agree with this next hope.

I think that if the GOP ends as a potent political party it will certainly cause the end of the Democrat Party shortly thereafter. That party is so far left now that there is no room for other opinions or aspirations among those who have supported them for generations. They have been canceled too. If there is only one party left, it will soon split into two, at least. It's already dissolving into chaos. Its leadership is unhinged and even Democrats know it.

Disaffected Democrats of the rational type will leave in droves just as quickly as disaffected Republicans will leave the scene of the GOP crash. If we are lucky enough to be pulled from the wreckage of the “two party”system we may save the country and freedom after all. At least I hope so. 

All this hope has made me tired. Reading it has probably had the same effect on you.

Grant Davies - January 2021

How to Get Free Money

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Wed, 13 Jan 2021 00:03:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

I have been busy watching the counrty implode so I haven't had time to write much lately. But a recent investment opportunity has arisen and I need to take some time to spread the wealth around. Capitalists and socialists alike enjoy the spread of wealth as long as it's getting spread their way.

One of my former lives was spent as an investment advisor so I can't help myself. I just keep pumping the good stuff out. There is no charge for this advice. It's a dividend being paid to readers of this blog as a reward for loyally reading this tripe for so many years.

Enough of that nonsense, now for some sound advice:

For the second time in less than a year the kind folks in government decided to give you some funny money. It was a bipartisan bribe to keep the dimwits placated while they shoveled the fiat currency to their cronies. Many of whom are foreign governments. It's all monopoly money of course, but the infants and unborn won't get wise to it while these folks are still breathing. So it's all good.

So here's a question; what to do with that $600 bucks ($1200 if you have a spouse) when the decimal points get deposited into your bank? I'm here with good news! You can make an investment where your cost basis is zero.

That's right, the money fell out of the printing press in the sky so it's manna from heaven, or hell, acording to your perspective. You got it for free so use it to buy something that you think has intrinsic value. It doesn't matter what you pay since you can't lose money on the investment. It doesn't matter if the price is high or low, now or in the future, since it was acquired with "free money." If it goes to zero you have the same amount as you had before you got the money and made the investment.

That brings us to Bit Coin. The price of that money has risen from $4,000 fiat dollars per coin ten months ago to $40,000 per coin a few days ago. Currently $33,500 as this is written. 1-12-21. So, is it too high to buy now? Or too volatile? Or just "in a time out" on it's way to $100,000? It just doesn't matter when your playing with house money!

All you can lose is what you never had coming anyway. So, zero cost basis. Of course, any money or other investment would work just as well in this fantasy, so go for it. Lots of people buy lotto tickets because they think they might get rich. Any investment, including tulip bulbs, is better than that, so why not?

When I get my bribe I'm going to buy $600 worth of bit coin. I might get rich or I might lose...nothing. It ain't my money, it will be paid for by my grandchildren. Maybe I'll leave my bit coins to them in my will.

Of course this whole post is tongue in cheek anyway. Maybe.

Walter E Williams, a Fundamental Economist

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Thu, 03 Dec 2020 03:52:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

A great friend of liberty passed away yesterday. 

I'm not much into naming people as heroes, but Dr. Walter Williams was a hero to me. I have read his books (all of them, I think) and still own quite a number of them to this day. 

I was introduced to his work by an essay he wrote titled "The role of government in a free society." 

That essay resides in the guest bathroom of our home for the edification of any overnight guest we have while they are otherwise occupied in that room. 

I was fortunate enough to attend the below presentation that Dr. Williams made (of that same title) in 1994 in Chicago. If you have never read the essay I'm referring to, or seen the video of it before, you would do well to watch it now.

This presentation, and others like it, were the inspiration for my evolution from a bloviating opinionator into a person who analyzes problems from a fundamental standpoint. I still may not get it right but it has worked out somewhat better for me than before.

Williams was a genius at making complex problems understandable even to people like me. He was known by many as "the peoples' economist." He wrote his last column just days ago.

He keeps things simple and fundamental. And no matter how complicated people try to make things, almost everything is simple and fundamental.

Elections Don't Matter

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Tue, 27 Oct 2020 18:11:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

Writing click bait titles to blog posts is a form of entertainment for me. I'm not very good at it. But I'm easily amused, so I do it.

The above title can be used to get people to read this stuff because everyone either agrees, disagrees, or wouldn't read anything here no matter what. That just about covers all the blogging bases.

This essay can go in a lot of different directions. Readers have probably formed an opinion about what it was going to say in the single second it took to read the title. Almost everyone will be wrong. Get used to it. I got used to being wrong all the time. You can too.

So where is this going? It's heading toward the preposterous election system that the country has morphed into. It used to be that we had a bad system. But at least we were used to it. Now the details change so often and are so convoluted that no one knows what the hell is going on. One new wrinkle is mailing out millions of ballots to people who didn't ask for them. What could possibly go wrong?

A lot of people have no confidence that an election will succeed in its fundamental purpose. So let's get back to fundamentals.

Most people (except power seekers) were hopeful that the process would yield good choices. They hoped for open access for voters and candidates alike. They hoped for fair and honest elections. They wanted a simple system where the results were certain and the peaceful transfer of power was a sure thing.

It may be that we never had those things. But most were satisfied that it was close enough. Today we certainly do not have those things.

As an aside, if there wasn't so much un-needed power being passed out it would hardly matter who won the elections. But that is a topic for a different day.

Here is what the system has morphed into instead.

A constant battle and changing rules about:

Who is allowed on the ballot.
Who is allowed to vote. Citizen or non citizen? Resident or non resident? Adults or children?
When the vote should be taken. On one day or over a rather long period of time?
When shall the votes be counted?
How the vote will be cast. In person or by mail?
How a state will cast its electoral votes.
How campaigns will be paid for.
Who determines access to the debates.
Whether people have to prove they are entitled to vote.
Who can donate to a campaign and how much.

There are other issues as well but that's a short list to start with. No wonder people are confused and have lost confidence.

Depending on the answers to those questions, elections can matter or not. But those are not the only reasons elections may not matter. Some folks, like me, never have a real chance to be counted. That's because no candidates, except the "approved" ones, are given a real chance to be elected.

The biggest problems are not being addressed. And they never will be by the ruling party. Yes, there is a ruling party. It has two wings but it's the same building. That party will not allow it to change. No party gives up power willingly.

What should we consider in order to get back to the fundamentals mentioned above? I thought you'd never ask. Actually, you never did ask. But I'll pretend you have been waiting breathlessly for that opinion.

So, do elections matter? I think some do. But only if they are conducted after the problems are corrected.

I have some ideas and you probably do as well. Unless, of course, you like the current system.

Fundamental things I think must change.

It should be easier to get on the ballot
There should be conclusive evidence that someone qualifies to vote. If it's too much trouble for someone to prove they are qualified, they don't vote. It's their choice.
The governments only role should be to insure a fair count and prevent fraud.
No laws or regulations that favor any system or political party should be made.
No "matching funds" should be provided.
The government should not pay for any primary elections.

If parties want to select their candidates by public votes they should pay for it themselves. If they want to light up cigars in smoky back rooms and pick someone for their party to run for office, it could hardly be worse.

It goes without being said that gerrymandering has disenfranchised more people than any other single gimmick that has been perpetrated on the electorate. Additionally, I think "ranked choice" elections like the ones that are catching on in some states (Maine is one) should be debated and expanded.

You may have other ideas. We have a comment section on this blog. Feel free to use it.

A Short Story

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:04:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

Two men walk into your bank and steal your money. They are wearing masks. This time they are Halloween masks. One looks like Joe Biden and the other looks like Donald Trump. 

They do not announce "this is a robbery." They steal your money by making it worth less than it was worth. 

You thought they were in line to make a deposit in your account. You saw the check they deposited. It was for $1200 and you were very happy. Your wife got one too.

By the time you figured out that you were robbed and were sad about it you had forgotten the whole incident. 

The end.

Squashing the Little People Again

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:13:00 +0000

By Grant Davies 

Two economic illiterates "debated" last night and one topic they agreed upon was that the government should use wage and price controls when it comes to the minimum wage laws.

 Of course they disagreed on the level. But that was just so we would think they represented a choice for us on that concept. 

The truth is, the people least able to withstand having governments' foot on their throat are the same people who get suffocated by this kind of law. Even The NY Times, a far left tabloid, at one time said the minimum wage should be ZERO.

But more important than economics, the law is a violation of basic human rights and is morally repugnant. It's a fundamental concept and this blog is about fundamental things. In my view people who actually care about the little people should familiarize themselves with the concept. We can safely conclude that these two politicians have missed that concept, perhaps even purposely.

Lots of well meaning people misunderstand this concept because minimum wage laws sound like they're compassionate. Therefore it's a pretty popular policy politically. Often bad ideas look good at first glance. Many people haven't considered this concept.

These two mopes agree that it's okay to do harmful things to poor people if it helps them get votes. 

Here is a link to an excellent article about the NYT position back when they got it right, for a change.

Jon Miltimore is the author and he gets it right pretty much all the time.

The World's Shortest Blog Post.

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Tue, 15 Sep 2020 12:19:00 +0000

We gave up everything for nothing.

A Report From The Front

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:21:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

I'm putting on my war correspondent hat today to report on the action in the US war with domestic terrorists.

The terrorists are winning handily at this point. Many cities have been laid waste and a number have surrendered.

Large swathes of entire states have been ceded to the terrorists. Those states are notably, Washington, Oregon and California.

The invasion is widespread but the most progress by the terrorists has been made along the entire west coast.

The supposed US defenders have turned on the militia in some places in a tactic that seems designed to aid the progress of the terrorists. They have arrested members of the militia for brandishing their own weapons in defense of their homes and businesses. New recruits to the terrorist side are being provided by the practice of releasing criminals from jail.

It's unclear if the country as a whole will fall but terms are being negotiated by the sides. They are rumored to include the legal dissolution of private property and the ceding of most political power to the terrorists in exchange for the temporary cessation of burning, looting, and murder.

One political party has called for defunding/dismantling of the defenders except for the purpose of arresting citizens who do not comply with the edicts concerning the wearing of masks and social distancing. No reinforcements are expected and desertions are at a high point among the current defenders.

Things look bleak for the republic.

For a very long time I have been exhorting people to "get a helmet." My latest advice is to put the helmet on. It looks like a long war.

This Post is Not About Masks

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:33:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

"Charlie" was played for a fool with this ad. Don't be like "Charlie."

The article below is not primarily about masks. Rather it may be about blindfolds or at least blind faith. Essentially, this article is about science. It's not about debating whether or not to wear a mask.

"What does a story, demonstration, or test really say? Does it support the stated conclusion or advice? Does it even bear on your question, or is it simply irrelevant? You can always find someone willing to tell you what to do. With so much evidence on both sides of a question, you’d do better to think for yourself." - Ramon P. DeGennaro

A popular link circulating on the internet shows the results of a demonstration. Dr. Richard Davis sneezed, sang, talked, and coughed into agar cultures wearing a standard surgical mask, and again using no mask. The result is a powerful image: The cultures without the mask clearly show more microorganism growth.

The strongly worded conclusion from the post’s author? Wear a mask. That way, “Lives will be saved.”

A picture is worth a thousand words, but a picture is not a good substitute for thoughtful analysis. Does the image actually support the conclusion? Or even worse, is the image misleading, steering you to an incorrect conclusion?

Indeed, Dr. Davis’ own conclusion of his demonstration is considerably less emphatic than the author’s: “A mask preventing your spit & breath from flying out of your mouth, even if doesn’t catch it all, will stop some spread of bacteria (see [in this demonstration]) AND LIKELY VIRUS (not seen [in this demonstration]).” ~ Rich Davis, PhD, D(ABMM), MLS June 27, 2020, emphasis in the original.

That’s far less powerful. First, as Dr. Davis is careful to say, the cultures show bacterial growth, not viral growth. Bacteria are much larger than viruses, so a test showing that a mask blocks bacteria gives us no direct evidence that masks help block COVID-19 and other viral infections, such as the flu.

This doesn’t mean the demonstration is necessarily irrelevant for viral infections. But to inject a dramatic photo of bacterial cultures into the COVID-19 conversation is at best misleading. Masks may or may not be a good idea for you, but Captain Michael Doyle, the commanding officer of a coronavirus testing site, says, “The only mask that the CDC considers safe from you getting the coronavirus, the only way to actually prevent you from inhaling it, is the N95 mask.”

So, based on Captain Doyle’s statement, should we not bother to wear a mask? Again, masks may or may not be a good idea for you, but his statement is also potentially misleading: Although Captain Doyle is absolutely correct, he is discussing whether the mask protects the wearer. Perhaps we should consider those around us.

Do you remember what we were taught even before we attended elementary school? “Cover your face with a tissue or handkerchief when you cough or sneeze!” Returning to the sneeze image, a more informative demonstration of bacterial protection would be for Dr. Davis to compare a surgical mask with a simple handkerchief.

Yet, even that wouldn’t give direct evidence of whether a mask protects either the wearer or others against a virus. The demonstration, after all, uses bacteria and not viruses.

The point is not whether you should wear a mask, or even whether someone should be allowed to force you to use a mask. By now, enough credentialed sources have weighed in on both sides of the issue. As recently as May 22, 2020, the New England Journal of Medicine wrote: “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.” Still, you can find ostensibly reputable sources to support your opinion. Rather, the point is that you should think about that evidence.

Read the rest here and please visit this site, it's uniformly informative.

Rational Politics and Wild Predictions

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Sun, 05 Jul 2020 17:05:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

Time to make a quick detour from the current national conversation for the sake of our sanity and just perhaps have a little fun while we are at it. So let's talk about irrationality on something other than the virus for a post or two.

Even though I usually try to refrain from writing about politics, (preferring to bloviate about fundamental ideas and concepts instead) I must admit that the lack of sports, normal human interactions, or other normal distractions, has out of boredom, led me to make wild predictions about politics recently.

For instance you might recall that I predicted quite a while back, right after Super Tuesday, that Joe Biden would not be the Democratic nominee for the Presidency in 2020. I'm notoriously bad at these predictions but I'm sticking to that one until it proves to be incorrect. Other scenarios obviously exist.

It's irrational for the Dems to nominate Biden as he slips ever more rapidly into senility. Don't get me wrong, I truly feel badly for him and anyone who suffers from this horrible affliction. It may affect me too at some point. Some may even argue that it already has, but I digress.

What I consider to be irrational decisions and policy prescriptions by Democrats seem quite rational to them and therefore they continue to make them. With some success, I might add. Rationality, at least my definition of it, does not seem to affect what they do, so I'll assume they will continue be irrational on most things over the long term. Here's the setup:

Having disposed of Crazy Bernie the Socialist, (but not his policies) they now have to get rid of Crazy Joe in favor of someone who is also crazy but doesn't mutter incoherently all the time.

So, prediction time.

Who will they replace Joe with? You can round up all the usual suspects, list them, and make a decent case for most of them. But I'm going with the long shot since no one expects me to be right anyway.

I think the odds are that they will make a rational decision just because the laws of probability predict that it has to happen sooner or later.

Therefore, they will choose Michelle Obama.

They get a far left authoritarian again, who happens to be a woman, black, and coincidentally married to the political messiah that caused them to have their legs quiver in 2012. She apparently spent most of her time for the eight years of his presidency telling Barack what to do and say so she knows the ropes well. Certainly she is more qualified than her husband was at the time he was elected so there's that too.

So there you have my new wild political prediction. When she is nominated as a last minute replacement for the seriously ill Joe Biden and the media begins to have political orgasms over her candidacy, remember that I was the one who predicted it. If it doesn't happen, you will just chalk it up to me being as wrong, and possibly senile, as I usually am.

Rioting Is Good?

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Fri, 12 Jun 2020 14:29:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

Most of my readers most likely understand the fallacy of the "Broken Window" theory. But this post will give everyone a chance to share it with others who may not. A better understanding of fundamental economics is beneficial for society in general.

Therefore, I submit this three minute video and a link to the blog International Liberty on which it is featured and my favorite econ policy wonk, Dan Mitchell.

As hard as it might be to believe, there are still some "economists" who profess this nonsense in regards to the recent lawlessness.

And here is a new tradition I just made up; if anyone is ever having a beer with me and mentions the name Bastiat I will clink their glass. I'm too cheap to buy them a beer.

Fundamental Policing

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Fri, 05 Jun 2020 21:10:00 +0000

Law Enforcement? Handcuffs and a gun?

By Grant Davies

The chaos that has engulfed the USA in recent days has put the "Virus Panic of 2020" on the back burner for a time.

The panic chaos will have to wait for the country to stop burning before bringing it back to a boil as soon as the media needs to cover up for their political buddies again. I predict it won't take long. There is a lot to cover up for.

In the meantime, the video of a man who had been arrested being murdered by a cop while other police looked on, has temporarily drowned out the calls for political heads to roll on the virus response.

Just in the nick of time for out-of-their depth politicians who have caused the deaths of thousands of people with their proclamations and edicts. Gretchen Whitmer and Andrew Cuomo may think that they have escaped the elder death toll they caused in the nursing homes they infected. We shall see.

So right now the focus is on the police mayhem. It is caused by the few bad actors and those who cover for them. This problem has stubbornly refused to go away for many years now.

It's because no fundamental reforms have been made. The pack has been reshuffled more times than a blackjack deck but the cards always remain the same. A different king or queen comes to the top, (because they say "heads must roll when a bad cop acts out) but the cards are still the same and the dealing resumes as before.

There is no mistake that police officers are as human as all the rest of us. Most people try to do the right thing even if they fail sometimes. All of us fail sometimes. But some people never care about doing the right thing. They care about themselves. They are called sociopaths. And sometimes they are psychopaths as well. The police aren't the problem, bad people are the problem.

This is an opinion blog. I have an opinion about what is wrong with the police departments and an opinion concerning what to do about it. I also have an opinion about some of the things that have been proposed. Let's roll with the last one first.

Some have suggested dissolving the Minneapolis police department, for instance. They think it should be replaced with police who act as social workers and "community relations" officers. Those notions are preposterous. It's not their job.

"Hello? 911? Yes, someone is breaking into my garage. Would you send the police to convince him this is a bad idea?" Thanks, I'll hold on the line. Please hurry though, he has already pried the door open."

Others suggest fiddling with policies of policing. Like better training, or more police, or "sensitivity training." That is the wrong approach. They are conflating features with benefits. Features come later, benefits should be the focus. So likewise, I reject those "solutions" since they miss the fundamental point of policing. This blog is primarily about fundamental things. It's not usually about policy.

So let's define the purpose of government before we move on. We should have the discussion often among ourselves about the fundamental role of government in a free society. But for now, let's rely on an already accepted definition. It was defined by some pretty smart (but also human) guys a long time ago. Thomas Jefferson wrote it down for them in a document called The Declaration of Independence.

It's crystal clear what they decided upon even though it has been ignored for most of our history. The part that applies goes like this;

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men," (Bold is mine.)

The part in bold is the most overlooked phrase in the Declaration. And it is the answer to the question concerning what is wrong with the police departments and what to do about it.

Somewhere along the line our protectors became enforcers. They became known as, and identified as, LEOs. Law enforcement officers. Tax collectors, revenue producers, dispute resolution officers, and jailers. Enforcers for politicians.

The police should be reorganized from top to bottom on every level, federal, state, and local. Their new instructions should be, "your job is to defend the rights of the people. Don't allow anyone to violate anyone else's rights. Not other citizens, not politicians, not governments, not businesses, not unions, nor any other organizations or players will be allowed to violate rights."

Everyone has individual rights, there is no such thing as group rights. If you hurt someone or take their stuff, you have violated their rights. And you should be dealt with. The police slogan shouldn't be "We serve and protect." It should be "Defending your rights."

Nothing is a silver bullet, but this is where we should fundamentally begin. So there are my opinions about what's fundamentally wrong and how to begin to fundamentally correct it. Your opinions are welcome below.

Feeling The Fundamental Chaos

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Tue, 12 May 2020 15:46:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

It started out as a FaceBook post concerning the Governor of the State of Pennsylvania threatening the counties of that state with "consequences" if they don't comply with his edicts. I decided to expand upon that here.

It occurred to me to list a few lines in that post about what is going on now.

Here's the expanded list and a few reflections:

Our governments are fighting other parts of our governments.
Our governments are fighting our people.
Our people are fighting the governments.
Our people are fighting our people.
Our families are fighting with each other.
Our friends are discarding each other.
Our governments are violating our rights instead of defending them.
Our police are violating our rights instead of defending them.
Our people are disregarding the police.
Our people are disregarding the governments.
Our people are wards of the state.
Our people are frightened by the government into disregarding their own rights.
Our people don't believe the "news" sources.
Our people are reporting on each other's behavior.

The list could be expanded more, but most people get the idea.

All of this was happening before the virus scare.

So now it's not just the list that has expanded. The size and scope of those things has expanded. And the curve of those things hasn't flattened. It's steeper, much steeper.

This is what Chaos looks like. It didn't start with an illness. But the illness sure put a giant magnifying glass on it.

Our society is unraveling. Perhaps collapsing. Things that are being done right now may lead to even worse things soon.

I'm not feeling the love.

Rights, Stuff, and The Gulli-virus

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Sat, 25 Apr 2020 20:09:00 +0000

Editors note:
The post below has been edited for clarity. The original was poorly written. In fact this is nearly a rewrite. The concept of the post has not been changed but the tone has been moderated and clarification has been added. The original could give the impression that the author was insulting his readers. Good writers don't do that. It was not the intention.

Often my writing is snarky and that is not universally well received. My apologies to readers for the poor expression of ideas in the post. I give no apologies for the opinions expressed. This is an opinion blog and it is not expected that agreement with those opinions will be universal either.

Some writers have the luxury of editors who can tell them when the water is muddy even though the writer thinks it's clear. Unfortunately in this case the writer and editor are the same person.

Without caution, snark can turn into hubris. So this is my mea culpa. I shall attempt to be more cautious. I hope you will wish me luck.

By Grant Davies

Some political media types have tried to frame the argument between the "stay at homes" and the "let me work agains" as "Lives vs the Economy."

For a very long time people (myself included) have listened to the arguments these media types have made and chose which side we are on. But we thought very little about why they were framed the way they were. My opinion is that they are framed in a way that will divide people. Divide and conquer is a very old trick.

We keep falling for the trick time after time. The above argument involves a false choice. I suspect that those who still were buying into it after having a few days to think about it show the symptoms of the gulli-virus.

Like COVID, it is said you can have it for a few days before you notice it. Some even recovered before they knew they were ill. Unfortunately, some will not recover at all.

Gullibility went viral before the Corona did and it has long been a pandemic. And yes, I just created that virus out of my imagination. Viruses aren't the only things that mutate. I have personally contracted this virus many times. Hopefully I have recovered but no immunity exists for this one. It's part of the humanity virus, for which there is no vaccine.

Here is the point, I would sum up the current philosophical battle this way:

Some would rather give up their rights for some favored policies and perceived safety, and yes, for some stuff.

Others would rather forego the policies, perception, and stuff to keep their rights.

When you think about it, isn't that what all the arguments over government are fundamentally about?

I Don't Got My Mind Right

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Sat, 18 Apr 2020 12:17:00 +0000

Courtesy of Warner Bros

By Grant Davies

Surely, one of the greatest films made during my life was 1967's Cool Hand Luke.

Each time I watch it I get another piece of the symbolism and another piece of the message. And I've seen it more times than I can count. Literally.

Events happening right now have caused me to revisit a lot of those concepts and symbolism.

To a lot of us those current events are starting to look a lot like past events. Working age people of my parents generation endured the Great Depression. Working age people of my generation and even my children's generation endured the Great Recession. Now we must all go through what is being dubbed the Great Suppression.

As this plays out, the characters in this drama are starting to look a lot like the bosses in that movie. We have governors like Michigan's Gretchen Whitmer taking on the persona of several different characters.

One is "Carl the floor walker" who lays out the rules and the punishments for violating them near the beginning of the film. Another is the "Captain" and still another is the "Man with no eyes."

In Whitmer's most recent made for TV presentation, she doubled down on her edicts and ended the whole sorry affair with a threat to her chain gang prisoners. Like Carl, she laid out the rules and punishments.

"Any man buying grass seed, spends a night in the box. Any man riding in a motor boat, spends a night in the box. Any man visiting his summer cabin, spends a night in the box. And the biggest one (after the huge demonstration against her over-reach in Lansing Michigan) Any man playing political grab ass, spends a night in the box." I guess that violates the "loud talking'" rule as well.

Her version of a night in the box is actually another month in the box, with your house as the box. After blaming everyone but herself for the blowback - just like the two bosses in the movie blaming each other for Luke having dirt in the wrong hole - she threatened her constituents.

The prisoners watching out the windows of their hut as Luke is tortured by the authorities are like the people today who are "cowering in place." And like the boxing scene they keep exhorting him to "stay down, damn it!" One even says "someone should stop this."

Even though just about every ad you see on TV nowadays says "we are all in this together", we actually aren't. You see, when it comes to each other and especially Boss Governor, "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

At the end of the movie, after Luke is murdered by the man with no eyes, that boss gets what he has coming from one of the prisoners. I hope the same happens to her in the election that comes at the end of this, because she is the man with no brain.

When it comes to wearing gloves while shopping, washing our hands, wearing masks, and worst of all, not hugging my family, I'm all in. But when it comes to obeying the inane edicts of Boss Whitmer, I Don't Got My Mind Right, Boss.

And in the end, my question to the ultimate boss in the sky is the same as Luke's was: "And just where am I supposed to fit in?

Investment Advice

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Thu, 16 Apr 2020 18:26:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

Ten years ago I notified the State Of Illinois regulators that I was ceasing business as an Investment Advisor. I filled out all the papers and jumped through all the bureaucratic hoops and stopped operating my lilliputian service. It was a side gig anyway and I wanted to be totally retired.

Since then, I have avoided giving investment advice to anyone. I actually did very little of that even when I was briefly in that business. I won't bore you with the details of that. Suffice it to say my guidance was very narrow and applied to only one small part of any portfolio.

However, in light of recent events and actions by the Federal Reserve Bank and the government, I feel like I should give some blanket advice that you heed at your own peril.

It concerns advice on how to spend your government check when you receive it. The money is being provided by the FED's virtual printing press. In other words, out of thin air. Neither Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, or the tooth fairy had any hand in this magic. But I'll tell you who will pay for it in the end.

Surprise! It's not you! I bet you thought I would name you as the signatory on that six trillion dollar check. And even if you pay for it in higher prices down the line, the real people who are on the hook are..wait for it..your grandchildren! Dontcha just love those little devils! Even though they don't know it, they are so generous!

And make no mistake, in lost purchasing power, economic growth, and career opportunities they will pay through their runny little noses. So how can you invest in something in order to make their pain a little more manageable?

Here is my advice for two investments you can make:

1) Take your check, divide it by the number of your grandchildren, take the money and go buy some gold coins (or other actual money, if you can figure out what that may be) for each of them and put it somewhere the government can't get it's greedy paws on it. History tells us that safe deposit boxes won't work. But the backyard and a shovel is worth considering.

2) Take a few dollars and buy each of them a few used paperback books by Milton Friedman and hand them to the kids as soon as they can read.

So there is my advice, take it or leave it. The price was free so, you know the old axiom. But no matter what you do just remember who is owed the money.

PS Don't ever think the government is just making another horrible mistake. This is part of an obvious plan that they think will solve/coverup all the past mistakes they have made in the last century or so. More on that in future post.

Political Prediction

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:09:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

I'm going to try my hand at political prediction again. There is no evidence to suggest I will be correct this time either.

But here goes:

I am predicting that Joe Biden will not be the Democratic candidate. So, Obama's endorsement is for nothing except a kiss goodby to creepy Joe. In a few years he will be a distant memory.

If anyone wants to revisit this post - after the Democrat powers dismiss him from the political scene using one of the many devices at their disposal - they are welcome to either congratulate me or call me a moron. I invite them to do so.

Either one will be acceptable to me.

PS - I'm often like the straw man from OZ, but this one is a no brainer.

The Deadly ISMs - Venezuela

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Mon, 13 Apr 2020 16:22:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

In today's installment of The Deadly ISMs - Venezuela, we take a look at what happened with the advent of "Democratic" Socialism in that country. It isn't pretty.

However, I would opine before we even watch this short video we should examine the two words in that description, Democratic and Socialism.

Thankfully, Socialism is getting beat up quite a bit lately by almost any thoughtful person who understands what it really is. For all you "Bernie Bros"; It ain't "free stuff." It's UN-free stuff.

But you don't need me to pile on with my own refutation of that evil system. You can't avoid it on the net unless you really, really try. So let's focus for the briefest moment on the other word. Democracy.

Ever since we were kids, we have been told how wonderful and noble Democracy is. However, the people who founded this country, and a lot of other people down through time, rejected it as a way to organize society politically. There was a good reason for that. It sucks just as bad.

It is a system that seeks to force minority people to obey the commands of the majority. I know a bit about that since I'm a minority person. Huh? Yep, in a ton of categories, the most important of which is, I'm an advocate for liberty, I'm in the minority. And I'm used to it.

"Democracy" is also sometimes defined as "Ochlocracy" Mob rule. In a later post I'll expand on that a bit. But for now let's get back to what went wrong in Venezuela.

Comments welcome below.

The Deadly ISMs Pt 1

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Mon, 06 Apr 2020 15:56:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

As you undoubtedly noticed, this blog has a quote right under the header by a guy named Matt Kibbe.

There are a few reasons why it is featured there, but the most important is that it's fundamental. Kibbe deals in fundamental things and that's why his "Kibbe on Liberty" interviews are featured on this blog. I recommend them.

The following video deals with all the "ISMs" you can think of and clarifies what those categories actually mean. Later videos deal with specific topics associated with the ISMs and I intend to post them here from time to time. They are all about fundamental things.

Once again I invite you to comment in the section below. You can agree or disagree or make observations of your own. My only requirement is that everyone keeps it civil and show respect to others even in disagreement.

The Redefinition of Socialism

noreply@blogger.com (Grant Davies) — Thu, 02 Apr 2020 13:24:00 +0000

By Grant Davies

"Redefinition: the action or process of defining something again or differently. - Oxford"

I'll begin this post with a little background in order to set the stage for my main point. Let's start with one recent redefinition of the term in question.

In order to make the detestable, murderous ideology of socialism more palatable to the gullible, Bernie Sanders and others attempted to redefine the term. They re-branded it as "Democratic Socialism" and claimed that some Scandinavian countries were socialist and also held democratic elections. Ergo, the name.

They then extolled the alleged virtues of government programs common to some of those countries. Doing so, they thought, would allow them to sell the idea to people in this country. It would also garner them the power to transform the US into the actual socialist nightmare they desired without that pesky democratic part.

The trouble was that those countries (Sweden comes to mind) aren't socialist. The lie was exposed and the ruse failed. At least it failed with enough Democrat voters to send Bernie packing in the primaries. (For the time being anyway. If funny uncle Joe starts wearing the paper slippers before the election, who knows?)

Let's recall for a moment the initial stage of the redefinition. It started long ago when socialists finally had to admit the horrors that the USSR, Red China, and Nazi Germany unleashed on the world. More modern-day horror stories like Cuba, North Korea, Cambodia, and Venezuela only added to their problem. In that stage they explained it away by saying the system was good but the wrong people were in charge.

But this isn't about that nonsense. It's about the much more preposterous and maybe dangerous redefinition of the term being made on social media today via various memes posted by people who proudly call themselves "lefties" or "progressives" as a way of virtue signaling to each other.

Having failed in both of the earlier attempts to sanitize the definition, they have now decided that they might convince the gullible by saying that ALL government programs are actually forms of socialism.

This won't work either. But it only has to convince the people who buy into "envy politics" until November when selecting a new government might occur.

Here is one of those memes. There are others but this will give you the gist of it.

P.S. If everyone gets a check from the government because of the shutdown, it's just another program, but not necessarily socialism. If however, the Trump government's trial balloon of taking ownership of part of the businesses they bailout (with our grand-childern's money) comes to pass, that would fundamentally be socialism. Because that's the actual Un-redefined definition of that vile system.