I realize that we're finding it hard to fill our PD ranks, but this one looks more likely to have received his badge from a box of Lucky Charms than from the Police Academy

/

“I’ve been watching your career as you progressed,” Police Chief Heavey said. “You’ve always been an officer who initiates action. You’ve always been the first one off your Big Wheel to back up other officers and will be an outstanding asset as supervisor to  the patrol division.”

The pipeline from school to Zoo

/

Francis Menton

Here is a fundamental proposition to which I subscribe: The only thing worth being in life is an adult. By the word “adult” I have something specific in mind. An adult is someone who, at a minimum, either alone or in a family structure, provides for himself or herself. That’s the minimum. Even more worthwhile is being an adult who also, through effort and within a family structure, creates and provides for a family. Still more worthwhile is being an adult who, after fully providing for a family, also assists others who may need help, beginning with extended family, and potentially then reaching to the broader society and to charity.

I understand that there are substantial numbers of people who are not capable of achieving the status of “adult” as I have defined it. They may have mental illnesses or incapacities that make it impossible to cope in our challenging world. However, for myself, I cannot imagine living any other way than as an adult. And I also can’t imagine why anyone who is capable of living as an adult would willingly give up that opportunity.

The alternative to living as an adult is living as a dependent on others or on society. You are relieved of all responsibilities, and somebody else somehow comes up with whatever you may need in life, be it food or housing or health care. Your own life is no longer burdened by the need to provide for yourself and family, and you can live without stress and without need to fulfill obligations.

In other words, this is the life of a zoo animal. Does any human being actually want to live such a life?

If you think that no sentient human could possibly want such an existence, then you need to look at the program of the group calling itself the Democratic Socialists of America. That organization has posted what it calls “Our Program” at the website program.dsausa.org.

And yes, the whole idea is that in the world we envision, no stress or effort is required on your part, while all the necessities of life will be provided as public goods. This apparently is the sales pitch that is catching on with some substantial cohort of college-educated young people. It turns out that remarkable numbers of people, particularly these young people, think that they would enjoy a life of zero stress plus handouts. I don’t believe they actually would enjoy it if they had to live it, but they seem to think they would.

….

First, imagine the stress-free life, where everything is provided by somebody else:

Speaking of bills: you don’t really have them anymore. You have no debt. You don’t need health insurance. You don’t pay a mortgage or have a landlord, because comfortable housing is a human right. Your retirement is publicly funded. Food, education, energy, medicine, and transportation aren’t for-profit businesses; they are common goods and utilities.

(Bold in original.).

In this imaginary world, there would be no need to work or pay bills:

[W]hat if you were free to spend your time how you like without worrying about cost or dreading going back to work? What if you didn’t have to think about paying rent or loans at the end of the month, or saving for college, or affording groceries? What would that be like?

But don’t worry; you “don’t have to live like this,” i.e., as an adult:

Democratic socialists know that no one has to live like this. If we lived in a classless society and governed ourselves, we could freely build a world without war or poverty. We could build a world where no one suffers for their race, gender, or religion, and everyone is free, equal, and cared for. Building this world is the guiding star of our movement. When we labor for our common good instead of private profit, we can all have a secure and dignified life, and use our time and talents how we wish.

A “classless society” where “everyone is free, equal, and cared for.” Yup, sounds like the zoo. But don’t they have zookeepers over there? How does somebody get to be one of those?

My experience in this is somewhat limited, but I’ve never known anyone who lived a grown-up life of dependency and was happy about it. People who live on handouts never find the handouts sufficient or satisfying. Why would they?

Well, bottoms up!

/

Hey, whatever floats your, er … your …

NY lawmakers want to bring back sex-fueled bathhouses — 40 years after ban during AIDS crisis

I’m not a supporter of most bans, especially those that seek to control acts between consenting adults (like liquor stores selling nips to customers, or Starbucks dispensing high-calorie sugar drinks, say), but to claim, as these advocates do, that this would be some kind of safety measure is … dubious.

Here’s a related story from Maine:

Maine’s Needle Exchanges, Designed to Limit HIV, Instead Gave Rise to Worst-Ever Outbreak

Murphy embraces the Devil — again

/

“Sure, I loved Graham, but he’s gone; I’m an abdul el-sayed nazi now because, c’mon, what’s the difference? A commie’s a commie, am I right? Am I right?”

I don’t think Murphy has any principles — he’s certainly never displayed them so far in his political career — he and the rest of the Democrat upper class are just hoping the’ll be eaten last by the rising Red Tide, and are thus embracing the DSA’s candidates’ communism. They won’t last.

The Twitchy post I’ve linked to is focused on Murphy’s new pal Mohammed’s virulent anti-Semitism and hatred for the US (“America deserved 9/11”), but before we get to that, someone — everyone? — should be demanding of Murphy that he specifically detail what part of the DSA platform he’s endorsing: nationalization of all major industries?; huge tax hikes on “the rich” and corporations?; free daycare for everyone?; universal, free health care?; 32-hour work week, paid at previous 40-hour rate, with unlimited personal days off?; defunding the police?: abolishing our entire military? The list goes on, but watching him squirm out of these without explicitly rejecting or endorsing them would be entertaining.

Here’s Twitchy’s take on the anti-Semitism in the new Democrat party Murphy’s involved in*; If it’s intended to persuade America’s liberal Jews not to vote for any of these people, it’s a futile gesture, because they’ll continue to vote for their destruction until they’re carted away, just as their forebears ignored Hitler’s rise back in the old country “because how could such a civilized society return to barbarism?” They, and we, seem to be on a path where we’ll find that out.

For example:

AI Overview

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced she will skip the state's Democratic nominating convention in August due to safety concerns and experiences with harassment. Nessel, who is Jewish, cited worries over rising antisemitism within political spaces and stated she did not feel physically safe or welcome to attend. [1, 2, 3]

Background and Concerns

  • Stated she did not want to be chased, harassed, or yelled at while at her own party's event.

  • Highlighted concerns regarding a shift in political discourse and responses to Jewish public figures.

  • Pointed to past instances of friction with progressive and pro-Palestinian activists over her office's actions. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Update:

Abdul El-Sayed Is Now the Most Radical Senate Candidate in America

El-Sayed campaigned with Hasan Piker, the radical left-wing streamer who believes America deserved 9/11, that the fall of the communist USSR was a "catastrophe," and dismissed claims that Hamas used rape and sexual violence against Israelis on October 7, 2023, and called for the murder of capitalists. Despite all this, El-Sayed refused to distance himself from or disavow Piker's extremist rhetoric. 

"I'm not here to disavow people's views," El-Sayed said at the time. "I'm here to have a conversation about how to get money out of politics and put it back in the pockets and pass Medicare for All. That's the conversation that folks are to listen to. This whole goch game, platform policing, cancel culture, I thought we were over it."

Evergreen:

Actually, even if it doesn't pass in California, the Democrats are already looking to bring it national

/

In the interest of saving time, rather than search for links to previous statements made by our communists on this subject I went to ChatGPT for the answer; it’s mostly accurate, but fails to include the unlamented former DSA/Democrat Maine senatorial candidate Graham Platner, who called for both a national and global tax; the DSA itself; NYC Mayor Mamdani; and numerous congressional candidates, some of whom won last night and are headed for Washington.

Q: what political candidates and sitting politicians have advocated for either a national or global "wealth tax"?

ChatGPTD:

There are two distinct ideas that often get grouped together:

  1. A national wealth tax: A country taxes the net wealth of its own residents (typically above a high threshold).

  2. A global or internationally coordinated wealth tax: Countries agree on a common framework or minimum standard to tax the ultra-wealthy, reducing opportunities to avoid taxation by moving assets or residence.

Below are some of the most prominent advocates.

National wealth tax advocates

United States

Democratic presidential candidates

  • Elizabeth Warren

    • Made a wealth tax a centerpiece of her 2020 presidential campaign.

    • Proposed annual taxes beginning at fortunes over $50 million, with higher rates for billionaires.

    • Continues to sponsor the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act.

  • Bernie Sanders

    • Proposed an even steeper wealth tax during his 2020 presidential campaign.

    • Reintroduced wealth tax legislation in 2026.

Current U.S. lawmakers

  • Pramila Jayapal

  • Ro Khanna

  • Brendan Boyle

All have sponsored or co-sponsored wealth tax legislation targeting ultra-millionaires or billionaires.

…..

Summary

ProposalMajor political advocates National wealth tax: Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pramila Jayapal, Ro Khanna, Brendan Boyle, many French left-wing politicians, Spain's governing left, Norway's Labour and Socialist Left parties

Global/international wealth tax:Brazil under Lula, officials from France, Germany, Spain, South Africa, plus numerous former heads of government and economists supporting the G20 initiative

It's worth noting that while national wealth taxes have been advocated by many elected politicians over the past decade, the idea of a global coordinated wealth tax is much newer. It has primarily emerged through the G20 process beginning in 2024 and remains a proposal rather than an agreed international policy.

(FWIW)

I read an article a day or so ago pointing out that the total wealth of billionaires in the US is about $6.7 trillion, while we’re running the government at an annual $5-$7 (the chart below says $5 billion, I’ve read higher numbers), and we owe $170 trillion. Confiscate all the billionaire’s assets , wipe them out (query — who’ s supposed to buy the illiquid stocks that make up much of that wealth?), and you can run the country for a year. And then what? Who would ever rebuild the companies and enterprises that can generate enough cash to fund the country going forward?

That’s not a concern of the communists, whose goal is to nationalize everything and transform the the country into a nation of government-dependent peasants.

UPDATE: Another question for ChatGPT, regarding European countries that imposed “wealth taxes”, only to discovered that they produced little revenue and annoyed the intended targets sufficiently for them to move their assets and, often, themselves, out of reach. Then there were the lengthy legal battles over $values. I fear Mamdani’s free day care and buses are going to be delayed, again.

Sweden (most frequently cited)

Sweden had an annual net wealth tax until 2007.

Reasons for repeal included:

  • High-profile entrepreneurs and wealthy families moved assets—and in some cases themselves—abroad.

  • The tax raised less than 0.5% of total tax revenue.

  • It was widely viewed as encouraging capital flight while generating relatively little money.

  • The repeal ultimately had support from both center-right and Social Democratic politicians.

Famous examples often mentioned include:

  • Ingvar Kamprad, who lived in Switzerland for decades, citing Sweden's tax environment as one reason.

  • Other prominent business owners also relocated assets or residency.

France

France had the Impôt de solidarité sur la fortune (ISF) until 2018, when it was replaced with a tax applying only to real estate wealth.

Critics argued that:

  • Thousands of high-net-worth taxpayers left France over the years.

  • The tax discouraged investment.

  • Revenue was modest relative to its economic costs.

One of the most publicized cases involved Bernard Arnault, who famously sought Belgian residency during debates over higher wealth taxation (though he later withdrew the application). The extent to which the tax alone drove migration remains debated.

Other countries

Several other OECD countries also repealed wealth taxes:

  • Austria (1994)

  • Denmark (1997)

  • Germany (1997)

  • Netherlands (2001, replacing it with a different system of taxing savings/investments)

  • Finland (2006)

  • Luxembourg (2006)

  • Iceland (2006; later temporarily reinstated after the financial crisis)

The common reasons cited were:

  • administrative complexity,

  • difficulty valuing assets,

  • relatively low revenue,

  • tax avoidance,

  • capital flight or relocation of wealthy taxpayers.

Pending sales reported

/

137 A Doubling Road, $14.450 million. pending. It sits on just 1.65 of the 6+ acres the builder paid $4.650 for in November, 2022, so more where this came from.

Way up north, 10 Gaston Farm Road, $3.950 million, is also pending, 15 days on market.

Not to be outdone, 13 Hidden Brook Road, Riverside, $2.950 million, is pending after just 6 days. Given recent land sales in Riverside, it’s probably safe to predict you won’t have this house to kick around anymore.