Category Archives: Local

Anatomy of a Conservative Lie: China is a Capitalist Country

Conservatives and reactionaries keep saying that China has adopted capitalism. What a stupid joke that is. All conservatives lie, no exceptions. There is no such thing as an honest conservative. I have never met one in my life. Conservative ideology is based for the most part on lies, though some Libertarians are quite honest.

For the most part, conservatives lie like they breathe. Conservatives literally need to lie to live.

Let me tell you something.

China is one of the most Communist or socialist states on Earth today. Fully 45% of the Chinese economy is publicly owned, and it does extremely well. Much of the very high economic growth has come from the public sector.

How on Earth can conservatives say that China is capitalist when 45% of the economy is state-owned? How ludicrous. But realize that all public firms in China operate on the profit model. They all compete with each other, so you have a steel mill run by one city competing with a steel mill run by another city. Many of the fastest growing industries are run at the municipality level.

China’s fully state-owned firms also do very well. In fact, they do so well that Republicans say that China’s public firms are “not fair” because American capitalist corporations can’t compete against them! The reason is that China’s firms get subsidies from the state. Poor capitalist corporations! They’re too inefficient to compete against Communist state owned firms. Poor babies!

Do conservatives realize that the state owns every single inch of land in China? How on Earth is that possible in a capitalist country? Capitalism is primarily based on the private ownership of land. No private ownership of land, no capitalism. Real simple.

I would also like to point out that the Chinese state spends an absolutely incredible amount of money on its people. Since 45% of the whole economy goes directly to the state, they have a lot of money to spend. And they spend it very wisely too. As I understand it, US capitalists believe in a minimal state, and there is nothing they hate more than state spending. Huge state spending is seen as wasteful tax and spend policies by all capitalists on Earth. Wherever you have massive state spending, you do not have a capitalist system. But I would like to thank conservative and reactionaries for praising China, the finest example of modern Communism!


Filed under Asia, Capitalism, China, Conservatism, Economics, Government, Left, Libertarianism, Local, Marxism, Political Science, Regional, Socialism

Look What Happens When You Let Women Run the Show

Yee: This is just male chauvinist nonsense. Either rule will work when you enforce it, people learn to adapt. Taliban and Saudi societies are so difference from the Philippines, still people in these places live a normal life.

As for the rulers themselves, as long as they’re good at organizing things, it’s will work. This is the main quality that required to run a society. Females actually are better.

Depends. Are the women ruling according to the rules and mores of women or according to the rules and mores of men. Look what happens when you let women make the law. Prohibition was put in by women. Women’s long-term activism was the only reason that Prohibition was passed at all. Although it came one year after women were given the right to vote, Prohibition was a societal change that was made by the rules and mores of women. All over the world, whenever alcohol is made illegal or restricted, it done most of the time by women.  The result of Prohibition? Total chaos.

That’s what happens when you let women make the rules. And in Communist insurgencies, typically Maoist ones, they often put women in charge of the local village and town governments. What’s the first thing they do? Over and over I have read that the first thing they do is make alcohol illegal. Result of making alcohol illegal?


Sweden is governed according to the rules and mores of women. That’s why it is a nightmare state for men.

Female rulers are fine. You can have an all-female government for all I care. But they must govern according to the rules and mores of men, not women.

Look what happened in California when we let women make the rules. The state of California just voted that on all university campuses, you must have affirmative consent for every sex act. Like you want to kiss her, you have to ask, “Can I kiss you?” You want to touch her tits? You have to ask her, “Can I feel your tits?”

Guess who put those rules in?


What is the result of this stupid-ass “affirmative consent” nonsense?


Those are the sort of lunatic rules and laws that you get when you let women run the show and govern according to the rules and mores of women. According to the rules and mores of women, that idiot affirmative consent rule is 100% rational. That’s how women actually think. They think a rule like that is completely reasonable and sensible.


Filed under California, Europe, Gender Studies, Government, Higher Education, Law, Left, Local, Maoism, Marxism, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, Sweden, USA, West, Women

No, DSL and Cable Companies Do Not Compete

EPGAH: And no, the cost of providing WiFi access is nonzero, otherwise you would open up your router, turn off the password, right? WiFi is also slower than hardwire by at least a factor of 10. Hell, that’s the whole idea of MAC Addresses.

Plus, the more people on one access point, the slower it is for everyone. Think of a congested highway – maybe China’s week-long traffic-jam if it helps? – vs. having a country road all to yourself.

Most importantly, at some point, it connects into the Internet by an actual hardwire, and that line has to be paid for, even if it doesn’t have to be maintained.

DSL and Cable fight each other, speed vs. price (Cable is faster, DSL is cheaper) except on university grounds, where AT&T (DSL) is given a LEGAL monopoly. People who can afford it go T1 or even T3 if they have more money than brains, and give the slowpokes on Cable and DSL the Finger.

Satellite IS a natural monopoly, because no one in their right minds would accept speeds just over dial-up if they had ANY other option! BUT if you are THAT far out in the sticks, you have no other viable option. It’s that or dial-up. Or you can pay some ridiculous 5-figure sum to get Cable or DSL to extend their service a quarter mile. This is not hypothetical, I was actually IN such a situation a few years back.

Full Disclosure: I have Cable, 50 mbps. I like my speed and I would not appreciate a bunch of freeloaders slowing it down for me. And no, I would not trust an “If You Like Your Speed, You Can Keep Your Speed” slogan.

I am not sure why universities would give access to a single provider, but universities usually do this with everything. They buy their hamburgers from one source. Hell, they buy just about everything from a single source. Anyway, is there any evidence that the DSL company is charging the students more due to its monopoly? At any rate, it might be interesting to see what the university’s argument for allowing a single provider is. They probably just think it’s simpler that way since they have single providers for most everything, as it’s obviously simpler.

What difference would it make if wi-fi costs money? The cities are trying to offer it for free to their residents (to be paid out of the city’s funds), and the competition-hating Republicans flipped and passed laws banning cities from offering wi-fi to their citizens, as it was thought to be serious competition for the legislator-whores’ beloved DSL and cable johns.

DSL and cable absolutely do not compete on price, service or anything. They each have a monopoly and there is no competition at all. They both offer a total shit product with total shit service for an insanely excessive price. Fact is that in countries where the state is running it the speeds are vastly higher than ours, so much higher it is not even funny.

If you opened up DSL to competition, yeah you would see some real competition. I remember back when we had dial-up, we had the wildest competition. They were all competing on price, service, everything! It was a consumer paradise!

Neither DSL, cable or satellite compete with each other in any way, shape or form. They all offer ridiculously slow speeds, awful customer service and a preposterously overpriced product, and none of them are competing with each other!

Let’s see if DSL and cable companies compete on customer service. Obviously they do not compete at all because the DSL and cable companies are routinely rated the worst in the country at customer service. They are also routinely rated the worst companies in the land. Not coincidentally, they come out last in both surveys because they each have monopolies, one in DSL and the other in cable. When you have a monopoly, you don’t have to have good customer service because the better your customer service is, the more it costs you and the less profits you make.

Really the only reason that any business offers good customer service is because they have to! Most if not all businesses would love to treat all their customers like complete crap because you make more money that way.

The only reason businesses are decent to customers at all is because they have to be due to competition! If you treat your customers like crap, your customers will start migrating over to your competitor to do business with them. I punish a few local businesses that way for treating me like crap. Not coincidentally, every business ever punished that way by me was run by someone from the Indian subcontinent – one by Pakistanis and two by Punjabis. Monopolists generally offer horrific customer service because people have nowhere else to go. And the worse you treat your customers, the more money you make, as good customer service costs money and cuts into profits.

I suppose the state could just buy out the phone lines, cable lines or satellites (though the satellites are probably state owned anyway) and then allow whoever wants to to utilize them to compete for cable, DSL or satellite. I suppose if they wanted to offer faster speeds, maybe they could rent out more of the pipe. I am trying to think of how we could do this. It’s long been known that our Internet service and cellphone services are both complete shit mostly due to the fact that they are privately run.

However, there is now quite a bit of competition in cell service opening up. I’m not sure how that is happening. I believe that the big providers are renting out some of their product as sort of franchisees. Anyway it seems to be working. It seems like there is a lot of competition in cellphone service now.

However, for some time, there were only a few providers, and as with cable, DSL and satellite above, they had agreed not to compete. All of the cellphone companies were offering diabolical contracts, ridiculous pricing and utter shit service – they had all agreed to provide a shit product for a ridiculously high price. Non-compete agreements are extremely common in capitalism. They probably ought to be illegal, but the anti-competition loving capitalists love these agreements as much as they love price-fixing. At some point, the non-compete agreements seem to have broken down, and now they are competing a lot.

Personally I find that the fact that each cell network built its own set of cell towers to be one the stupidest “accomplishments” of modern US capitalism. So we have four or five different cell phone tower networks where we only need one! Retarded! There should only be one cellphone tower network, and it ought to be either regulated by the state or owned by the state and rented/leased out to private companies to compete over public lines. I very much like the idea of the state owning the backbones of industries and then leasing/renting out space to private companies to use them to compete.

The problem is that the people often get ripped off. We own the airwaves, but we auction them off for pennies on the dollar to crooked media companies which we have allowed to concentrate to the point where all of our news comes from six different billionaire networks who all say the same thing. Sort of like Pravda or People’s Daily under Communism. One source of news, and it has one party line. I honestly feel that our modern monopolized, billionaire-owned news is not much better than the media under Communism. We get about the same diversity of views in either.


Filed under Capitalism, Capitalists, Economics, Government, Journalism, Law, Local, Politics, Republicans, Scum, US Politics

Republican Propaganda Analyzed: “After 1995, Welfare Rolls Crashed, and Disability Payments Soared”

From here.

Figures. Whenever you hear these horrific stories from conservatives that make you want to abandon liberalism altogether, it’s almost always some sort of a lie. That’s why I banned a lot of rightwing commenters on here. For one thing, conservatives are bizarre. I can’t imagine a liberal going to a conservative forum just to fight the wingnuts. Most of think think that would be like taking a swim in a sewer, and that’s pretty much what it would in fact be.

However, conservatives are just weird. They love to fight, and they love to fight their liberal enemies. Now why this is I am not sure, but I can guess. I get why they like to fight. Authoritarian types love conflict and hate peace. But why do they fight us? Well, they think they are Good and we are Evil. They actually believe that liberalism is pure 100% Evil. So when they fight us, they are just fighting Evil.

Conservatives also love to proselytize, while most liberals don’t bother as we consider most conservatives too hopeless to convert, and we don’t like fighting anyway. I get the impression that conservatives simply cannot fathom how any sane human being could ever believe in liberalism. Many conservatives have told me that conservatism is rational, logical, and reasonable: it’s just common sense. Many others say that conservative positions are actually empirically proven to be correct.

Never mind that hardly any politics can ever be empirically proven to be correct – how will you do it? Test it out in a lab under controlled double blind conditions and then run multivariate analysis on it?

Anyway, they think conservatism is commonsensical scientifically provable fact, like saying the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. To conservatives, liberals are like folks who are argue that black is white and 2+2 = 5. They simply cannot fathom how any sane person, given the proper facts, would not be a conservative. In other words, we baffle them.

Really there is no such thing as empirical politics.

Rightwinger: After the 1995 changes to welfare (and many of those changes were good, though not all), the number of people on welfare dropped–and the number of people receiving disability payments went up, up, up.

Leftwinger: Welfare rolls plunged, and poverty soared. They plunged because welfare was no longer an entitlement. Since it was no longer an entitlement, one might or might not be able to get any help, regardless of how great that person’s need, and counties put limits on caseloads. If, say, the their caseload limit was 100, and you were the 101th person to apply, you could not get aid. Strict time limits were imposed, regardless of circumstances. Desperately poor people are, indeed, simply dumped off on the streets. Caseloads fell because cases were closed and new cases were denied.

Poverty grew. What we always called welfare is gone. There is no general assistance or AFDC. TANF is a marginally subsidized, time limited work program (only for those with minor children).

Now, on disability: This is fairly complex (much info and links at When one applies for disability, it takes a minimum of a year, as long as 3 years, between the day you submit your application and the day your case is decided. Before you can even submit your application, you must obtain your medical records dating back many years, and official medical documentation confirming not simply that you have a disability (having a disability in itself does not make you eligible for disability aid), but that the disability is so severe that gainful employment impossible.

Only a doctor (not the SSA) can make that decision. All of this said: Many on welfare were the seriously ill and disabled who were not able to manage the (extremely complex, difficult) disability application process. They survived on GA welfare. (The bottom line was that it was simply cheaper to keep them on GA.) When welfare was ended, county agencies had to scramble to find a way to keep the truly disabled/seriously ill from being dumped out on the streets.

This resulted in a temporary surge of of cases being transferred from welfare offices to the SSA. (Nope. No fraud was involved — just saving lives.) One must have a medical (psychiatric) diagnosis of suffering from legitimate mental illness that is so severe as to make it impossible to maintain gainful employment.


Filed under Conservatism, Government, Health, Illness, Labor, Law, Left, Liberalism, Local, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

My State Is Ablaze

This site has some extremely cool photos and commentary of the California drought and wildfires currently ravaging our state.

There is also commentary on the insanity of California towns and cities which insist on adding more and more new homes when they have no idea if there is enough water for the new residents. It is in areas like this that capitalism fails most miserably and government in capitalist countries never seems to step up to the plate. Capitalist countries seem determined to suicidally “grow themselves to death.” It is like they are making a rope made up of twine from shredded up dollar bills and hanging themselves with it. With all the other awful things about greed, it is starting to become obvious to me that greed is also outright suicidal, an analysis that I have not seen much about.

Speaking of suicidal, the farmers in the Central Valley continue to over-pump groundwater like mad. The state previously had no regulations whatsoever on groundwater and was unique among Western states in that regard. Even ultraright states like Idaho and Utah have better groundwater regulations than we do! Governor Brown just signed a new groundwater bill but it is truly pitiful in that it doesn’t go nearly far enough to regulate groundwater in this lunatic state.

Apparently farmers are suicidal too. These crazy farmers will keep pumping that groundwater until there’s not a drop left and then the whole valley will dry up. Then the farmers will bitch and scream and demand to suck every river in the state dry. These farmers here are some of the stupidest and most reactionary and evil farmers in the US, and I am certain that they could easily commit agricultural suicide by draining the groundwater.

Over on the East Side, the land is sinking as much as 2 inches per month. Excuse me, but that is absolutely insane.

Here is a comment on the article:

Nin, It’s that terrible spectre, Growth. It’s had the whole planet under its spell so long that this self-created tyranny no longer discloses its true face, all we get to see is the frenetic race to doom, the spread of the contagion, business as usual.

John Keats, who had had medical training, had watched his mother and younger brother die of t.b., knew its course all too intimately, and was probably already aware of its symptomatic approach by this time, third week of April 1819. He asked of poetry that it be “felt on the pulse”. The pulse by this time is weakening, erratic, feverish. The production mills of the market are squirreling away their nuts, yet here he is, fading, failing, distracted, falling out of the busy world’s getting & spending picture —

On the cold hill’s side.
And this is why I sojourn here…

I saw those vacationers with their beach gear at dry, growth-choked Folsom Lake as today’s recreational sojourners, the consumption component in the economic cycle, sojourners, insatiable, passing through and using up but not staying long enough to check out the devastation endured by the doomed natives of the island.


Filed under Agricutlure, California, Capitalism, Economics, Fires, Government, Law, Literature, Local, Mother Nature, Poetry, Regional, USA, West

People Get Thrown out of the Section 8 Program All the Time

Godslayer writes:

You clearly have no idea how “section 8″ works.

You can’t simply “kick a tenant out” for damaging your property.

You will need to file papers, You will need to go to court to present your case.

You also need evidence that there is damage, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT since landlords are not allowed to enter without permission!

All of this costs time and money (no problem for a section 8 black because he doesn’t work.

By the time you see the judge 8 months have passed.

The judge rules in favor and orders Section 8 tenant to pay for damages with his non existent job.

A couple months later the Marshall comes in and evicts the tenant.

Landlord discovers that section 8 tenant has done 10’s of thousands of dollars in damage to the property to “get revenge” on the landlord.

Section 8 black goes to find another place to live, he can even sue for discrimination if you reject him!

But in reality this is what mostly happens

Section 8 black trashes the place.

Landlord doesn’t know because he can’t enter without permission.

Section 8 black lives there until the damages accumulate to tens of thousands in damages

Eventually things get so bad that section 8 tenant asks for landlord to fix the stove/fridge etc…

The landlord needs to play the eviction game and wait 8 months

The ONLY way to prevent a section 8 black is to have crazy requirements like must make 40x the rent, must have no criminal record, minimum credit score and apply it equally to everyone who comes to look at the rental property.

The housing inspector has NO authority to kick out the tenant.

The only thing the housing inspector does is check for roaches, broken appliances, leaks or other hazardous conditions and gives the tenant a right to demand that the landlord correct what the housing inspector found.

I do not know man. Here in this complex all problem tenants get evicted on a regular basis. I never heard there is much of a problem about it. This is an apartment complex run by a corporation.

A few years ago, my brother was told to turn down the music in his apartment. He said, “Fuck you!” to the manager. He was then evicted. There was no problem evicting him. It was no big deal.

I tell you what. I have a White friend on Section 8. She has cats. Well, the cats were shitting on the carpet and whatnot. They were also using the litter box a lot. On the day of a Section 8 inspection, the Section 8 inspector came and took one step in the door and said this whole apartment smells like cat shit. He turned around and said, “I am failing you.” My friend flipped out.

For the next few weeks, it was back and forth between Section 8, the landlord and my friend. They were pretty much going to throw her off Section 8 and the landlord was going to evict her because if she was off the program, she could not pay the rent, but somehow they got her back on. Her Mom had to go over there, and they spent days cleaning the place up, spent $100’s on cleaning the carpet, etc. It was a great big nightmare.

You say the housing inspector has no right to throw out a tenant. True, but apparently they can throw them off  Section 8 because that is exactly what they did to her. My male friend also got thrown off Section 8 for supposedly not turning in his paperwork. In both cases, HUD simply threw them off the program. Now that does not mean they were evicted. They were simply tossed off Section 8.

I am told we have a number of Section 8 tenants in this complex. I am not aware of any disastrous consequences such as destroying units. I been in a number of units, and I haven’t seen one ruined one yet. The landlord inspects units regularly, and the complex itself inspects units. The complex inspection team failed me the last inspection because they said I was using my place as a storage unit, not a living space. I was really scared, but I cleaned things up really well. I had a bunch of boxes laying around. They told me flat out that if I did not get rid of those boxes, they were going to evict me.

Another friend did turn in his paperwork on time, but somehow HUD lost it. He got a notice that said we sent you 2 paperwork packets, and you did not fill out either of them, so we are throwing you off Section 8. You have a right to appeal. Here is the appeal date. Fortunately he was able to prove that he had actually turned in the material, so he was put back on Section 8, but he was scared shitless.

I know a few White people on Section 8 around here, and they are all really scared of being thrown off.

If the HUD inspector comes around and you have thrashed that place, they will fail you. I am not sure if they give you a chance to clean it up. I have been at my friend’s place when the inspector came, and it is no light matter.

You say that the only way to prevent a Section 8 Black is to have all sorts of crazy requirements.

Well, before living in this city, I lived in two White towns in the mountains. I had some White friends in those towns who wanted to get on Section 8 in the county, and they were told that not one single landlord in either of those two towns of 25,000 people took Section 8. There were many rental units in those towns. It appears it is fairly trivial to refuse to participate in the Section 8 program. Most landlords participate in it because they like it, mostly for the reliable rent.


Filed under Government, Local, Sociology, Urban Studies

What It is Like to Be on Section 8

If section 8 is so tough, then obviously they don’t permit bad blacks. Where do these bad blacks live though?

Blacks can live on Section 8 and act bad for a while, but pretty soon, there will be an inspection or they will mess up the paperwork, and then they will be thrown off. When they throw you off, they do it in a really mean way, and my friends tell me it seems like the Section 8 people like to kick people off for some reason.

And once you are thrown off Section 8, I think you might be thrown off for life.

I am not sure where bad Black tenants go. I guess they just go live somewhere else. I mean most ghetto people are probably not in Section 8 housing.

I do not live in Section 8 myself, and I have never lived on it, but I have a pretty low income, so sometimes I am tempted…Yet I have a few White friends who live on Section 8 (around here it is not unusual for White people to live in Section 8 housing).

Section 8 housing is really hardass. You do not have to be an angel, but you cannot mess up at all. I think you cannot even get convicted of a crime when you are on Section 8. Or possibly no one in your household can be convicted of a crime. My White friends on Section 8 told me that they are deathly afraid of getting arrested and convicted of some petty crime because then they will lose their Section 8.

You are also banned from using drugs in Section 8 housing. They catch anyone in your household using drugs, any drug, even one time, and you are gone. Some of my White Section 8 friends do use drugs (pot), but they haven’t gotten into trouble yet.

Also you cannot be a nuisance tenant causing problems with the landlord and other tenants like making too much noise, fighting, or getting complaints from the neighbors.

My White friends on Section 8 tell me that they try to live angelic lives so as not to get thrown off Section 8. Keeping the drug use on the downlow, not making too much noise, fighting or causing problems, not getting complaints from neighbors, staying in good with the landlord, not getting arrested or especially convicted of a crime, and especially keeping the place from being thrashed because there are regular and I mean regular inspections.


Filed under Government, Local, Sociology, Urban Studies

The Truth about Section 8 Housing

Sam writes:

Well I have. I have a friend who rents section 8 houses to Negroes. Negro women with five kids. No job. He most of time makes decent money at this, but it’s a gamble because they ALWAYS destroy the houses. His gamble is does he make enough money rent before they make the house uninhabitable and move out. Then you have to redo everything in the house. It’s expensive. If they stay a while, he makes money. If they’re particularly savage, he loses.

If you thrash the dwelling, you are automatically thrown off Section 8. I have some White friends who are on Section 8, and I believe this complex here takes Section 8, though I am not on it myself. I have been told that the Section 8 clients here are quite good and they do not destroy the place at all. If they are any tenants engaging in any monkey business at all, they are thrown out quite quickly by the corporation that runs this place.

My White friends on Section 8 told me it is very strict, and you cannot thrash the place one bit. There are regular inspections and there is a ton of paperwork you have to do on a regular basis. If you do not do the paperwork, you are thrown right off Section 8. They love to throw people off, and they do it all the time. A friend of mine failed a Section 8 inspection because they had cats and the litter box smelled. They are strict as Hell here.

I believe this complex does take Section 8 and some tenants are on it. First of all, you can’t be on Section 8 unless you work or have an income. It’s not free housing. It’s just discounted. Section 8 has certainly not ruined this complex, but our landlord is pretty strict. I think this crap about Section 8 destroying whole cities is nonsense. In the White towns around here, all the landlords refuse to take Section 8. The only cities that take it are the poorer ones with lots of Hispanics.

I have some White friends on Section 8. It is a good deal if you can get it. I would not mind getting it myself, but there is I believe a 2-year waiting list here. I have been to the apartments of my White friends on Section 8. They are very clean and kept up as nice as anyplace.


Filed under Government, Local, Sociology, Urban Studies

Capitalists Hanging Themselves with Their Own Rope Again


I live right in the midst of all this Almond Insanity. It feels pretty hopeless on the ground here. All of the local media is completely controlled by Big Ag. The Fresno Bee is the largest paper in the region. It took me a long time to figure out how they were lying to me constantly. That’s because they do it so well. Big Ag literally runs that newspaper.

And Big Ag controls the entire state government too. That means both parties, Democrats and Republicans, and all politicians, liberals to conservatives. Looks like they’ve even got Jerry Brown by the balls.

Yeah, turn all of California into a dust bowl, that’s the ticket. Thanks a lot, farmers. Fucktards.


Filed under Agricutlure, California, Democrats, Economics, Environmentalism, Government, Journalism, Local, Politics, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, West

Porcupine Love

Q: How do porcupines have sex?

A: Very carefully.

Have you ever seen one of these things? I saw one in Zion National Park as a boy. I was on a trail and it ran up out of a dry stream bed and up a slope. Actually waddled is a better word. They don’t move very fast at all. It is as if they are not worried about you as a predator. They are also very fat! Much fatter than you might think they are. It was definitely a shock to see a porcupine. They are not very common out here in the West. One reason is that in Sierras, the Forest Service has been killing them with poison for many years because porcupines kill trees. The result is that there are not many porcupines left in the Sierras.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site. Donations are the only thing that keep the site operating.

1 Comment

Filed under Animals, Government, Herbivores, Local, Mammals, North America, Regional, USA, West, Wild