Saturday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Saturday, January 21. 2023

Where is everybody? A new hope for solving the Fermi Paradox

Naive Realism - When you're certain that you possess the real truth

California’s Green Debacle = The Golden State’s energy policies impose ruinous costs on residents but make no measurable impact on global climate.

Debt, Not the Debt Limit, Is the Real Fiscal Crisis in the US

Dems propose overturning the First Amendment

Spectator: The Pink Tide Returns to South America

In China Things Head South Quickly

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 05:55 | Comments (45) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Fermi: If you ignore the unsurmountable problem that 99,999999% of inhabitable planets are so far away that a spaceship could never reach us, then it might seem like we should have seen alien life forms. But 99.999999% of possibly inhabitable planets are so far away that they could never reach us.

#1 OneGuy on 2023-01-21 09:45 (Reply)

The national debt is an worse than most people think. It is a perfect trap to a long miserable slide to economic destruction. As it grows the interest payments go up. "Of course" we have to pay the monthly interest, right? So we cut back on important things to keep paying the interest and, oh yeah, we borrow more money too. Eventually the interest payments will match or exceed our critical expenditures and we will at that point either be taxing our population into abject poverty AND/OR Borrowing/printing money at disastrous levels. That process will destroy us. We may endure years even decades of grinding poverty inducing taxes trying to manage our national debt. You can't survive that, you can't come back from that. What is needed and very soon is two things:
1. A balanced budget amendment where we simply cannot spend beyond our revenues.
2. To pay off the debt. That is a one time buy up all our debt and essentially pay it down to zero with printed money and end it forever.

Step 2 will cause inflation and a period of economic uncertainty but it would last for months not decades and would be over and done with and wouldn't have destroyed everyone's economic position. But it has to be decided on early in this ongoing disaster and done suddenly, perhaps over a holiday weekend, so that investors and speculators wouldn't profit by it and sabotage it to some extent.

It could be done and it should be done. But our politicians rarely do what they should do.

#2 OneGuy on 2023-01-21 10:02 (Reply)

P.S. Welfare must end. All forms of welfare to individuals, companies, local governments and foreign governments. Welfare and free stuff must end. THAT is the largest part of our debt problem.

#2.1 OneGuy on 2023-01-21 10:32 (Reply)

OneGuy: 1. A balanced budget amendment where we simply cannot spend beyond our revenues.
2. To pay off the debt. That is a one time buy up all our debt and essentially pay it down to zero with printed money and end it forever.

Such as policy would be economically disastrous. While not as bad as a debt default, no one would trust American dollars in the future, which would be relegated to junk status. Wouldn't it make more sense to cut some spending and raise some taxes?

OneGuy: P.S. Welfare must end.

As you were asked in a previous thread, what do you consider welfare? And how much would it save? What about an 80-year-old with dementia who has sold their house to pay for their care and having exhausted their resources? Or a middle-aged person with osteodystrophy from kidney failure? Or a kid with cancer?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGnE83A1Z4U

#2.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 11:16 (Reply)

That’s a problem that should be addressed by State or local government, not the Federal government. Madison expressly discussed situations like this.

#2.2.1 Paul in Boston on 2023-01-21 11:23 (Reply)

Paul in Boston: That’s a problem that should be addressed by State or local government, not the Federal government.

Economic boom-and-bust cycles, culminating in the Great Depression, showed that economic conditions can overwhelm the entire country, far beyond the ability of individual states to respond effectively. Indeed, the same dynamic that affects investors, who pull back from declining markets exacerbating the collapse, also affect state actions.

#2.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 11:40 (Reply)

Economic depressions are the result of the business cycle. They have always been with us and always will be with us. Government tends to exasperate the cycle. Kondratieff was even executed by the marxists for saying that the cycles affect ALL economies.

#2.2.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-21 13:29 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Economic depressions are the result of the business cycle. They have always been with us and always will be with us.

Sure. That's because markets aren't perfect and will misjudge supply and demand. For instance, overproduction can lead to a glut and a slowdown in economic activity.

indyjonesouthere: Government tends to exasperate the cycle.

Procyclical policy will exacerbate the size of the trends. When a marketwide downturn occurs, people will stop spending and hold on to their cash, causing a further drop in the markets. Tax receipts to government will decline, and so, to keep the budget in balance, the government will cut spending, also causing a drop in economic activity. People are laid off, reducing spending even more, and the economy can enter a dangerous downward spiral.

Contrariwise, countercyclical policy, when there is excess capacity and excess liquidity, ameliorates the trend.

#2.2.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 13:40 (Reply)

The government imagined that its current countercyclical policy, about 8 years of "omnibus", of trillions in deficit spending will give us a soft depression landing. They, again, will be found to have mismanaged the economy with their spending that will result in an economic crash and burn. Just as their mismanagement after the 29 crash was disastrous and drug out the entire depression. The current debt at 8% interest will consume ALL tax revenues. THEN WHAT? Hope to die before we get to 8% rates?

#2.2.1.1.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-21 14:20 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: The government imagined that its current countercyclical policy, about 8 years of "omnibus", of trillions in deficit spending will give us a soft depression landing.

You shrugged about the possibility of mitigating the market cycle, but that is not an inevitability. For instance, Clinton raised taxes and cut spending programs, leading to a federal cash surplus. Many in Congress paid a political price for doing the right thing. Then, when Clinton was retiring from the presidency, the American people had a choice. They could set aside the surpluses in a "lockbox" or cut taxes to benefit the plutocracy. They chose the latter. Trump also cut taxes, primarily for the wealthy, during an expansion.

Joseph explained countercyclical policy.

indyjonesouthere: Just as their mismanagement after the 29 crash was disastrous and drug out the entire depression.

The economy expanded rapidly during New Deal.

indyjonesouthere: The current debt at 8% interest will consume ALL tax revenues.

Prudent spending cuts and modest tax increases will reassure the markets that America is serious about its finances. But playing chicken with the debt ceiling will cause further instability.

#2.2.1.1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 15:19 (Reply)

The market cycle will ALWAYS be with us. That is why they always provide a depression after the survivers of the last depression have passed. We forget our history as we move further along past the last depression. Read the Fourth Turning as a basic understanding of those cycles.

Clinton did not show a surplus using accrual accounting. He accrued more debts than his taxing paid down. Only when using cash accounting did a surplus show but cash accounting only relates to debt on old programs, not on new programs put on the Federal credit card. Increase SSecurity or Medicare/medicaid payouts or increase SSecurity Supplemental and that cost is pushed off to future generations.

The spending cuts have to balance the budget AND pay down the debt. Interest rates will exceed 8% and that will be the end of the dollar and any budget.

#2.2.1.1.2.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-21 17:47 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: The market cycle will ALWAYS be with us.

Sure. That's because markets aren't perfect and will misjudge supply and demand. For instance, overproduction can lead to a glut and a slowdown in economic activity. Said that already.

indyjonesouthere: Read the Fourth Turning as a basic understanding of those cycles.

While Strauss and Howe propose an interesting hypothesis, it lacks empirical support. Of note, the market cycle is generally of much shorter period than they propose.

indyjonesouthere: Clinton did not show a surplus using accrual accounting.

The federal budget deficit is defined on a cash basis, and economists treated it as such at the time. However, even with accrual accounting, the Clinton administration left a balanced budget. That means that not only did they pay down public debt, but money was set aside for Social Security. That's what the "lock box" was all about. Regardless, running a large structural cash surplus and paying down the public debt is a much better fiscal position than the tax cuts and increasing debt which followed.

#2.2.1.1.2.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 08:34 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Genesis 41:

Then Joseph said to Pharaoh, “The dreams of Pharaoh are one; God has shown Pharaoh what He is about to do:
The seven good cows are seven years, and the seven good heads are seven years; the dreams are one.
And the seven thin and ugly cows which came up after them are seven years, and the seven empty heads blighted by the east wind are seven years of famine.
This is the thing which I have spoken to Pharaoh. God has shown Pharaoh what He is about to do.
Indeed seven years of great plenty will come throughout all the land of Egypt;
but after them seven years of famine will arise, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt; and the famine will deplete the land.
So the plenty will not be known in the land because of the famine following, for it will be very severe.
And the dream was repeated to Pharaoh twice because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.

Now therefore, let Pharaoh select a discerning and wise man, and set him over the land of Egypt.
Let Pharaoh do this, and let him appoint officers over the land, to collect one-fifth of the produce of the land of Egypt in the seven plentiful years.
And let them gather all the food of those good years that are coming, and store up grain under the authority of Pharaoh, and let them keep food in the cities.
Then that food shall be as a reserve for the land for the seven years of famine which shall be in the land of Egypt, that the land may not perish during the famine.”

Joseph is recommending countercyclical policy.

#2.2.1.1.3 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 13:49 (Reply)

You do notice that it came out of savings of 20% of the crop each year and not out of adding to the deficit of the future generations?

#2.2.1.1.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-21 14:35 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: You do notice that it came out of savings of 20% of the crop each year and not out of adding to the deficit of the future generations?

It had to be in food because that was what was cyclical. Banking hadn't been invented yet, nor was there another regional source that could feed Egypt's population. The grain tax was in addition to normal taxes.

However, paying down the debt has the same effect. The government should raise taxes and cut spending during expansions, then cut taxes and raise spending during contractions. Some of this is done with automatic stabilizers. This evens out the economic cycle. Currently, monetary policy is the only mechanism being used, and it is not nearly as effective as fiscal policy.

You can't blame countercyclical policy when you don't, you know, apply countercyclical policy.

#2.2.1.1.3.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 15:22 (Reply)

Governments do not have the discipline to cut spending in good times and pay down the debt nor to cut taxes in order to provide capital for growth. Governments, including Clinton, only learn to tax and spend, wash and repeat. We have now spent beyond the ability to pay the debt back. The more socialism a government practices the quicker they reach the financial cliff.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-21 17:54 (Reply)

A companion piece to Debt, Not the Debt Limit.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/01/21/must-read-president-trump-warns-congress-not-to-touch-social-security-and-medicare-for-a-good-reason-hes-the-one-who-can-fix-them/#more-242395

#2.2.1.1.3.2.1.1 Zachinoff on 2023-01-21 21:30 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: overnments do not have the discipline to cut spending in good times and pay down the debt nor to cut taxes in order to provide capital for growth.

As noted, the Clinton Administration raised taxes, reduced spending on welfare programs, and paid down public debt. Other democracies, also with strong social support systems, have a better handle on debt. It can be a struggle, but it is not inevitable.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 08:40 (Reply)

As I mentioned above ... he accrued more debt than he paid down. By law, the government is to use accrual accounting in order to show the actual spending habits of an administration but the government refuses to follow that law.

The Clinton administration, with Barney Franks much needed help, blew up the Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac housing market that resulted in massive foreclosures and bank bailouts. Franklin Raines, the head of Fannie, was fined several million for his role in the fiasco. That was a example of government never having the discipline to quit manipulating markets with special program lending to diversities. They also managed a "wag the dog" moment to get involved in Bosnia/Serbia for which we still have troops to this day. That is Clinton accrued debt and the usual progressive reaction to undisciplined government.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-22 12:31 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: As I mentioned above ... he accrued more debt than he paid down.

We can provide the citation, but we can't make you read it:

QUOTE:

Financial Report of the United States Government 1999: The excess of revenue over net cost figure (accrual basis) contained in these financial statements for fiscal 1999 is $76.9 billion.

Better than a balanced budget. The facts don't change because you already made up your mind.

indyjonesouthere: By law, the government is to use accrual accounting in order to show the actual spending habits of an administration but the government refuses to follow that law.

Obviously wrong. See same citation.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 12:50 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Financial Report of the United States Government 2000: The U.S. Government is again reporting an accrual-based surplus, which this year is $46 billion. Additionally, this past year the size of the Federal debt held by the public has been reduced by $223 billion.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 13:09 (Reply)

They use cash accounting and accrual accounting. Which shows up on the debt clock that requires congressional approval to increase the debt?

Now go to the bottom of the financial statement and read the GAO report DISCLAIMER OF OPINION.
Because of serious deficiencies in the governments systems ... readers are cautioned that amounts reported in the financial statements and related notes may not be a reliable source of information for decision-making by the governments or the public.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-22 14:07 (Reply)

Now, name one government official or employee that will be held accountable for the lack of transparency or accuracy in the government budget. They will all get bonuses and another year on the government grift.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.2 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-22 14:13 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: They use cash accounting and accrual accounting.

That's right, which contradicts what you said above.

indyjonesouthere: Which shows up on the debt clock that requires congressional approval to increase the debt?

The debt ceiling includes debt owed to the public, as well as intra-government accounts.

indyjonesouthere: Because of serious deficiencies in the governments systems . . .

There are areas of uncertainty, such as equipment and inventory. That doesn't impact the fact that the United States had a balanced budget at the end of the Clinton Administration, along with structural cash surpluses.

indyjonesouthere: Now, name one government official or employee that will be held accountable for the lack of transparency or accuracy in the government budget.

Let's summarize your position: "Is not!"

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 14:19 (Reply)

Let us summerize your position. You minimize the accounting errors even though entire departments could not or were not auditable in all four years shown on that budget audit. USDA, DoD, AID, and OPM had no audit opinions. DOT, DOJ, and Commerce had no opinions in 3 of those 4 years. Any company providing that kind of non-information to the IRS would be bankrupted by the government and officers incarcerated.

Yet here you are insisting nothing of the sort. I would encourage everyone to read the disclaimer of opinion. Government bookkeeping is for the benefit of the government just as mafia bookkeeping is for the benefit of the mafia.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-22 14:51 (Reply)

Just because we don't know everything doesn't mean we don't know anything.

indyjonesouthere: You minimize the accounting errors even though entire departments could not or were not auditable in all four years shown on that budget audit.

How large are the possible errors? Do you have anything other than your say-so that the accounting errors are significant enough to change the overall budget numbers?

indyjonesouthere: Any company providing that kind of non-information to the IRS would be bankrupted by the government and officers incarcerated.

The Trump Organization has been literally making up numbers for years. They only reason they were brought to task is because Trump accidentally won the presidency.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 15:09 (Reply)

When the GAO refuses to stand behind the numbers because of "serious deficiencies in the system" then you can scarcely expect me to have any confidence in their "accounting system". That accounting system is money in and money out.

If you wish to see a pretend accounting system just observe the Bankman-Fried accounting and all their political donations to the democrats. Then observe the transparency of the Ukraine "contributors and contributions" from the 10% sanford and son.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-22 16:35 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: When the GAO refuses to stand behind the numbers because of "serious deficiencies in the system" then you can scarcely expect me to have any confidence in their "accounting system".

In other words, the error margins are infinite, and the deficit could be zero, or infinity, or negative infinity. That means your claim, that the U.S. ran a deficit in 2000, is unsupported. There's no way to know. That's a good thing. And something the American people can decide to do in the future. They have the resources. But you have to stop rewarding people who say that tax cuts pay for themselves and other such nonsense. If you want a strong economy, you have to be willing to support the infrastructure required.

Some data is better than no data. In fact, the publicly-held debt decreased by over $200 billion in 2000.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 16:49 (Reply)

Typo in the previous comment. Here's the corrected version:

indyjonesouthere: When the GAO refuses to stand behind the numbers because of "serious deficiencies in the system" then you can scarcely expect me to have any confidence in their "accounting system".

In other words, the error margins are infinite, and the deficit could be zero, or infinity, or negative infinity. That means your claim, that the U.S. ran a deficit in 2000, is unsupported. There's no way to know.

Some data is better than no data. In fact, the publicly-held debt decreased by over $200 billion in 2000. That's a good thing. And something the American people can decide to do in the future. They have the resources. But they have to stop rewarding people who say that tax cuts pay for themselves and other such nonsense. If you want a strong economy, you have to be willing to support the infrastructure required.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.2.3 Zachriel on 2023-01-22 16:51 (Reply)

Now you're talking pure gibberish. I can see why you bought into the AGW "data". It was produced using the same tedious, imaginary/lack of information but for causes you support.

"serious deficiencies in the system" means unreliable.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.2.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-22 19:07 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: "serious deficiencies in the system" means unreliable.

Some aspects of the statement are deficient, but not all aspects. Most of the data is reasonably accurate. In fact, the publicly-held debt decreased by over $200 billion in 2000. That's a good thing.

Let us know when you can support your claims.

#2.2.1.1.3.2.2.3.3.2.3.2 Zachriel on 2023-01-23 08:18 (Reply)

“what do you consider welfare?”
Any unearned transfer of public funds to individuals, corporations or other governments.

“And how much would it save?”
About $2.5 trillion out of the 2022 budget, or about half of the entire federal spending.

“What about an 80-year-old with dementia who has sold their house to pay for their care and having exhausted their resources?”
They would have Medicare and Social Security, they can choose to purchase insurance when they are healthy, help from their children or from their church. I certainly have no problem with “charity” my issue is with mandated giving by taxation.

“Or a middle-aged person with osteodystrophy from kidney failure? Or a kid with cancer?”

Siblings and parents, Insurance, charity, savings. You know what we used to do before the government decided to take most of our income to piss away on stupid stuff.

RE: the youtube video.
We just don’t allow the Democrats to cut SS and Medicare. They want to divert the money but we should stand strong and stop them. Stop the Agenda Project from turning us into a communist country. Support the constitution not Marxism.

#2.2.2 OneGuy on 2023-01-21 11:34 (Reply)

OneGuy: Any unearned transfer of public funds to individuals, corporations or other governments.

So, Social Security and Medicare. Well, it you drop those, then the budget would be balanced. Of course, millions of seniors would be left in penury. Gotta be better than making the rich pay taxes. Thank you for the arithmetic.

OneGuy: Siblings and parents, Insurance, charity, savings.

Sure. The good ol' days.

#2.2.2.1 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 11:43 (Reply)

Always the cry about cutting SS and Medicare as if there isn't any cuts available in federal spending. Could start with wasteful bureaucratic spending for solar and wind generation along with the rebates ( bribes) to EV owners. Could stop cutting checks to 1.1 million dead people and people who refuse to earn consider. Or funding NGOs whose only purpose is to sue the government.
Just a few ideas and there are many more the government doesn't even consider.
There's a lot of pork on that bone.

#2.2.2.1.1 Zachinoff on 2023-01-21 13:04 (Reply)

"So, Social Security and Medicare."

No! Duh! Those are earned benefits. They are retirement plans that Americans invested in. That too should be fixed. The federal government has stolen about $4 trillion from SS over the years it should be paid back. Then ONLY those people who have contributed to SS will be eligible to collect. AND only to the extent of their contributions. In other words the system should become fiscally solvent, with a fiduciary responsibility to the SS recipient and the entire system should be taken completely out of the control of congress. And it should be fully audited every year with a open and published report. That way the system would never go broke.

What most people fail to realize is how serious this national debt is. We will never pay it down. It is literally impossible for us to pay down the national debt. At the current rate the debt will reach $50 trillion in ten years. High inflation will become the norm. Just the payment on the debt alone will be in excess of $3 trillion a year. This will be an economic disaster.

The real question is do we do something to fix this now OR wait until the debt payments has crushed the economy and bankrupted everyone?

#2.2.2.1.2 OneGuy on 2023-01-21 13:10 (Reply)

OneGuy: Those are earned benefits. They are retirement plans that Americans invested in.

Technically, payroll taxes go to the previous generation. It's an intergenerational transfer from young to old.

Meanwhile, you have yet to name the programs and cuts that you suggest could lead to an immediate budget balance. Programs have names. Medicaid? Kick the old lady with dementia, the guy with renal osteodystrophy, and the kid with cancer to the curb. That's $700 billion. What else?

OneGuy: The real question is do we do something to fix this now OR wait until the debt payments has crushed the economy and bankrupted everyone?

It will cost less to fix the sooner action is taken. But you don't support taxes, and you haven't named sufficient cuts in spending. You apparently believe in magic spending cuts.

#2.2.2.1.3 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 13:20 (Reply)

Give credit to the few of the WEF for the all-time Yenan Way government buyout but to think that no one has ever heard of Hegelian tactics is the ultimate arrogance.
They made the "polycrisis" for their own benefit.
How much of these headlines and links are due to them?

#3 Deplorable Kulak Untermenschen on 2023-01-21 10:04 (Reply)

Man drives electric car 350 miles to see real cost and 'numbers didn't add up'

QUOTE:

After driving for an hour and 40 minutes, Steven made his first charging stop at Taunton Dean services on the M5, where he arrived with 25% battery and 45 miles remaining.

He waited for 40 minutes for the battery to charge to 60%, costing £19.62 for another 55 miles.

. . .With a full charge at home, a fast top-up at services, a slow top-up in Bristol and a super-fast top-up on the way back, the entire journey cost Steven £88.07.

Meanwhile, he calculated that the diesel cost for the same journey would have come to £50.24, "assuming 55mpg and 173.9p per litre", while the petrol cost would have been £53.28, "assuming 45mpg and 150.9p per litre".

Concluding his experiment, Steven said: "I wanted this to work, I really did. But after what I hope you will agree was a pretty comprehensive real-world test, I couldn't make the numbers add up.

"Whichever way I looked at it, the return trip had taken me 90 minutes longer than usual and cost me nearly £40 more. I certainly didn't expect that.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-drives-electric-volvo-350-28991522

#4 feeblemind on 2023-01-21 10:17 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Already, the price was struggling to beat his trusty BMW, which he said would use about a gallon for 55 miles, costing less than £8.

55 mpg for a BMW?

#4.1 Zachriel on 2023-01-21 10:23 (Reply)

If Quibble-DickZ would have read the article the author was comparing his 16-year-old BMW 318 diesel.

Cry harder, Quibble-DickZ.

#4.1.1 Zachinoff on 2023-01-21 11:14 (Reply)

re Dems propose overturning the First Amendment

They really want the 1st Amendment to be repealed, or ignored by the courts.

They don't want The Narrative questioned, and they don't want their pervasive corruption discussed.

And they would dearly love to prosecute people for the crime of voicing opposition to their policies.

#5 feeblemind on 2023-01-21 10:34 (Reply)

While totalitarians have been unable to ban the 1st Amendment they are quite adept at simply changing the meaning of words. It is the courts that need to disallow such shenanigans.

#6 indyjonesouthere on 2023-01-21 13:07 (Reply)

It always amuses me how some people are sure they know unknowable things. "There have to be lots of intelligent civilizations out there."

#7 Frank on 2023-01-21 19:38 (Reply)

Indeed. What we do know is that the odds, according to present data, of life of any kind developing even on this favourable planet are mind-bogglingly long. From an unlikely single-celled organism to a civilisation would be something else again.

#7.1 DeGaulle on 2023-01-22 10:02 (Reply)

Things have gotten so bad for Biden that it would actually be an improvement to have Kamala be president. Biden's recently revealed association with Chinese spies has made him a clear and present danger. Biden is obviously working for the CCP and at this point impeachment is too slow and uncertain. Bidens needs to be arrested and removed from office for the safety of our country and citizens. Joe has gotta go! Now!

#8 OneGuy on 2023-01-22 10:07 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Saturday, January 21. 2023

Saturday morning links