Observations on Condo collapse.

CONDO OWNERS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAJOR REPAIRS 

EACH OWNER WAS ASSESSED OVER $180,000

This tragedy in Florida has revealed some things that many condo owners may not be aware of. Major renovations are assessed to the owners who may have thought they were escaping the responsibilities of home ownership. One of the delays with the renovations was that the individual owners needed to get mortgages or financing to cover their share to the tune of $180,000 each. I suspect this will be a wake-up call for all those who are in this position, often in their post high earning years.

Everyone is already looking to assign blame and the lawyers are lining up. It is interesting from the pictures that the court yard, which was not supporting much weight, also sank by around 5 feet. Is it possible that the area under the foundation is actually an unstable sink hole. Florida's bed rock is not the best, is this just the first of possible problems with the limestone bedrock? Parts of Florida are ancient coral reefs or other types of bedrock not suitable for high rise building. It was never a problem when summer homes and cottages were on the beach.

It is likely that there will not be any survivors. It is now over a week. I hate to be a backbencher, but the heavy equipment and  a massive removal of this building should have begun by now. It is a trade off, but as time goes on, any survivors time is running out. Buckets and hand tools will not likely save anyone.

The best hope is that all existing buildings and their foundations will be analyzed. Also some kind of test boring to determine what exactly is beneath these buildings. Not much can be done for these poor folks and their families, but hopefully it will be signal that will prevent any other such tragedies.

In effort to disparage constitution, Biden disqualifies himself.

 CLAIMS GOVERNMENT WOULD USE AIR POWER AND EVEN NUCLEAR WEAPONS AGAINST DISSENT

NEEDS A COURSE IN REALITY AND HISTORY

In an attempt to dismiss the 2nd Amendment to the constitution, Biden has gone far off the deep end in his recounting of history and reality. While the United States government refused to use nuclear weapons in Vietnam and Korea, he insinuates this government would use these weapons against its own population. He also stated that airpower would be used against our own population, the same thing that this country rightly categorizes as human right abuse whenever it is used by others.

Biden also needs a lesson in history, the civilian population in the United States has always had superior weapons to the government. The colonists had better rifles than the British, who were the government at the time. The Indians had Winchester repeating arms at the little big Horn while Custer had single shot springfields. The gangsters of the 1920's had better weapons than most law enforcement. And most of all, does Biden really believe our citizens soldiers would use this massive fire power on their brothers and sisters or tell the bureaucratic elites in Washington and their politically appointed generals to take a hike or worse.

In effect, the citizens of this country could very easily have access to almost all of the weapons in the government arsenal.

Is this the road this president wants to travel, instead of listening to the grievances of the citizens, he wants to intimidate them with the threat of unlimited military power. All the more reason for everyone to protect the second amendment at all costs.

In an effort to minimize the importance of the ability of the people to defend themselves he has truly disqualified himself to serve as a president of these United States. 

Biden ran as a great unifier, this was, as usual with career politicians, just so much hot air. Both Biden and his party are hell bent on amassing as much political and now even military power to make sure that they can become a permanent ruling party. His contempt for the second amendment goes along with his contempt for the first amendment, the fourth, fifth, sixth, ninth and tenth  amendments. In effect he really doesn't believe any of those rights should be had by the people. The reality is the constitution and bill of rights is all considered irrelevant when it interferes with their dream of transforming  the United States into some kind of socialist dictatorship.

Why Oregon is the epicenter of "Critical race theory" and "Wokeism"

 BOTH THEORIES INTERSECT IN OREGON IN THE 1980'S

DERRICK BELL  AND BHAGWAN RAJNEESH AUTHORS

It is no coincidence that Oregon has emerged as the center of radical activism. Derrick Bell, the author of "Race, Racism and American Law", 1973, was a law professor at Harvard. His theory of Critical race theory was rejected by Harvard and he eventually emerged as the Dean of the University of Oregon, school of law in 1980. Even today the school is advertised as "Preparing students to drive change in the world" and that "Their students are innovators, activists and advocates for change"

It seems this university has been producing such activists for 40 years. If we see who the leadership of Antifa and other anarchist groups are mostly young white university students and even some professors.

In 1981 Bhagwan Rajneesh moved to Antelope, Oregon from India. He was at the time a Guru of his new age religion of Rajneeshism which was advertised as a non religious religion. The basic tenets of his philosophy is the rejection of traditional religion or societal norms and let the person find their own identity through meditation, and prayer. They reject marriage as bondage for women, advocated for childless lives due to overpopulation and reject most government regulation. When the individual had reached his fulfillment he has been "Awakened", It seems it has now been abbreviated to "Woke"

The Bhagwan bought the 64,000 acre plus Big Muddy ranch in Antelope Oregon for $5.75. He had his beginnings of recognition in the 1960's and as his followers grew, he began to have some conflicts from the Indian authorities. Most of his followers were upper middle-class and wealthy youth from western Europe and America. Many of them women and an average age of 30. Most were well educated with many advanced degrees.

They incorporated their own city of Rajneeshpuram which was mostly self supporting through agriculture and also several business's in Yoga and Stress management etc.. In the years of operation they generated over $120 million in income. They constructed their own housing and airport. They eventually began to have conflicts with the local residents and authorities which escalated into a biological attack on the county residents and a plot to assassinate the Federal attorney in Oregon. They also owned a Hotel in Portland. They used buses to pick up homeless people all across the country to swell their residents so as to be able to take control of County government, but they were still defeated. Their city was about 100 miles from both Portland and Eugene.

Originally populated by 200-400 people in 1981 by 1983 it had grown to near 3000. Near 7000 attended their first world celebration in 1982. Most new residence were encouraged to sell their belongings and become part of Rajneesh family. The administration was mostly run by women who had contact with Bhagwan. He was seen very little and didn't speak for extended periods.

Bhagwan came to U.S. on a visa for health care, eventually he was going to be arrested for immigration violations, but instead returned to India. His administration also fled mostly to Europe but were extradited back to the U.S. where they were prosecuted and convicted for numerous felonies. The city continued on for several years, but eventually most of the adherents were incorporated into the population of Oregon and all around the country. It was taken over by the state in 1988.

He then reopened his meditation retreats in India and has a following with many of the technology leaders of silicon valley. He died in 1990 at the age of 58, but his corporation is still active. It seems both these philosophies have merged into the new Socialist revolution. Or were they incorporated by the socialist revolutionaries. Either way these are the roots of these new semi-religious theories.

Is the new goal equity rather than equal opportunity?

ARE WE IN THE PROCESS OF REJECTING CENTURIES OF WHITE CULTURE BASED ON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES?

WILL WE REPLACE IT WITH MARXIST ATHEISM?

The attacks on Northern European and American culture are now in an all out effort for total destruction. At the same time, millions continue to attempt to migrate to countries based on those principles from countries who more or less have embraced some forms of the replacement polices advocated by the political and social activists. 

Maybe we could just trade in those old marxist activists for new immigrants.Would that then create peace and tranquility? 

We continue to hear about the injustices of slavery that was an ongoing practice all around the world primarily in  places without the rule of an established government or legal system. A practice that continues to this day in many of the same places were their ancestors came from. Places without stable governments and legal systems. I don't believe I have ever heard of complaints about those places. 

What about all the sexual slavery ongoing today in many American cities controlled by minority administrations. Not a word! Many are likely profiting from that new slavery.

It was an evolving white dominated culture based on christian principles that ended the government endorsed slavery in the developed world. It was such a culture that advocated for self government over authoritarian governments. It was that culture that endorsed the principles of equal opportunity for everyone.  

We now hear cries that we need more government authority to ensure equity for everyone, which  in effect means,  we want what you have earned and accumulated without doing what it took multiple generations, living by the principles that resulted in the accumulation of wealth.

These same people who talk of equity, reject an intact family. They reject patriarchy, which allows a man to be the head of his household and also requires him to be responsible for his family. If you want a father to be responsible for his family, you will need him to be the principal authority in his family. A father guided by christian principles and love for his family. They endorse single parent families and absentee fatherhood. 

They reject capitalism, but want to have access to the fruits of someone else's hard work created through capitalism.  Capitalism, as it should be practised, is the freedom to seek your own destiny and to keep the fruit of your labor. Freedom to prosper and freedom to fail. It produces innovation, creativity and prosperity for families and societies.The guidelines for capitalism have always been christian principles. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The best transactions are when both parties are happy about the transaction.

The rejection of christianity is the rejecting of all principles that will ensure a healthy and prosperous family and society. Laws created by government will never create stability, if the governed only obey by the threat of that law. Laws can only punish the wrongdoer, it cannot promote stability. Only self restraint guided by some other motive, such as religious belief, can ensure that stability. Only when there's peace and stability can there be prosperity.

We are now in a era of instability and chaos, intentionally created by those who want to eliminate all culture and religion. If we continue on this path we can expect the devolution of both man, families and society.  

We are judged by our actions, not thoughts and emotions.

WE HAVE LITTLE CONTROL OF OUR CALCULATED PERCEPTIONS

PERCEPTIONS ARE AN ACCUMULATION OF INFORMATION INPUT  AND PERSONAL EXPERIENCE

We are being repeatedly told that white majority America is a racist, bigoted country which bestows certain privileges and opportunities to white citizens but denies these same opportunities to other races especially blacks. We are also being told that we are personally bigoted and racist if we have perceptions that some races or groups of people are a threat or are poorer achievers than others.

Our brains are continually taking in information, whether consciously or not, and calculating perceptions and conclusions that are part of our biology, likely to protect us from danger and give us a basis for rational calculation.  We take in visual and audio information continually, whether in our everyday experiences or from radio, television or the internet.  We unconscionably analysis all this information and it allows us to make sound judgement about everything we do. Some people have some malfunction with certain information and this is considered a psychosis or phobia. An unobjective or inordinate fear of spiders, height, snakes, or other threats to our well being. While these threats are real and all these things will get the attention of all normal humans, it causes an over reaction in some.

So, we are told if we encounter several young black males on the sidewalk and we experience some anxiety, this is a sure sign that we are racist. Or if we have an opinion that blacks as a group are not as well mentally equipped as some other races we are racist. If we have the perception that women and men often respond to the same input in different ways, we are a misogynist. All these calculations are an accumulation of the input we have received during out lives. We all have had similar and also different inputs and have calculated different perceptions, some real and some exaggerated.

Today particularly, we are being bombarded with sound and visual information to mold our perceptions, whether it is to increase sales of a product, or an attempt to change public perception either for good or for a political advantage. While visual and other information is important, the defining, reliable and most relevant information is personal experience. Personal experience will quickly and often permanently override all other information. Whether it is directly personal or  witnessing experiences of others. Visual information will usually have more validity than just information that is not visual.

So when we see statistics that young black males are involved in a large number of violent and anti-social behaviors that input is stored. When we see 50 years of preferences for black people in education, employment etc that information is stored. We don't see these preferences for other races, but we do see them for females. This calculation is made unconsciously and we can calculate that women and blacks may be inferior to whites and males. Also that young black males may be a bigger threat than other groups. Is this a valid perception, maybe not, but it is the accumulated input society has been receiving for years. Can we by our will erase these perceptions, NO, only a input of a different perception will change our unconscious calculations.

It also applies to the perception by blacks that the police single out blacks at a higher rate than white people and that they are less tolerant in their interaction. This may be true or maybe not, numbers or statistics alone may indicate that is the case but there are many other factors to consider. Again personal experience will trump all other information.

One thing for sure,  if a person receives the input from their birth that race is the defining cause of their future problems, that perception will be hard to change. These perceptions about race have been reinforced by the media and politicians for political advantage forever,. These practices have been used by both parties, but the democratic party has certainly reinforced the idea that blacks have been intentionally held down by the white majority and they need special advantages to succeed. This creates a negative perception by other races.  Republicans have sometimes pointed out crime and violence to instill fear and garner support. Sometimes this is true and sometimes exaggerated, but videos of looting, arson and violence just reinforce a very negative perception, even when some of the violence and looting is being done by white anarchists and other politically motivated groups.

However,  I have hope that the vast majority of people do judge other people personally, not by any group perception. I think that an employer can make a personal judgment on an applicant for a job and believe this individual can be an asset to his or her business. To do otherwise would be a moral failure on the employers part even if he has doubts about his decision. If after such a decision he has a negative result, this could then become a permanent perception. Likewise if he is happy with his decision he will likely create a more positive permanent perception. We can not be judged by our perceptions, only acting on our perceptions in an unjust way. These perceptions by society will not change unless our accumulated experience and input of information changes.

Originally published 6/15/20

"Critical Race Theory", Racism with a fancy name.

"CRITICAL RACE THEORY"

  AN UNSCIENTIFIC EXCUSE TO DISMANTLE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ORIGINS OF WHITE PRIVILEGE, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND INSTITUTIONAL RACISM

The "Critical Race Theory" evolved from Black studies and studies of racism and race relations. It has grown as an accepted part of studies in the fields of Education, Political science, Women's Studies, Communications, Sociology, and African American studies. It has become ingrained in many Universities and has been pushed to be taught in business and government as part of diversity training or awareness. 

Professor Derrick Bell, author of,"Race,Racism,and American Law" ,1973, formerly of Harvard University attempted to incorporate these studies into Harvard Law School, it was rejected and in 1980 he became the dean of the University of Oregon School of Law. Is it just coincidental what we now see in Oregon?

It is the primary source of phrases  "White Privilege","Institutional racism", Whiteness as property, Microaggression and has been expanded to studies focused on any racial group except for White or Jewish. 

Its primary theories are based on anecdotal stories of racism and perceptions of any racial group who feels the system is unfair to racial minorities in America. It seems to encourage white people, especially women, to feel guilty about their own race.

This "Theory"contends that the present laws and institutions in the United states are based on customs, practices and laws of White culture that enforce racism and White supremacy. Adherents believe that the system results in a lack of quality education, sound housing, gainful employment, healthcare and a clean environment for people of color. 

The off shoots of this theory is that the United States constitution, laws, customs, practices and general history are all based on the perpetuation of white dominance. It rejects programs like affirmative action etc. and claims it was just an attempt to appear to be not racist to the rest of the world. 

Some proponents reject patriarchy and the traditional nuclear family as favoring the idea of White Privilege and institutional racism. 

Many reject traditional religion and particularly Christianity for being the source of much of the law and traditions of the country.

While this theory teaches about the inequalities and unfairness of the United States system, it does not offer clear solutions, at least not openly. 

Its adherents believe the police are enforcers of white privilege and white supremacy and capitalism.

They believe that laws should be enforced in a manner that takes into account the needs and disparities in the social order. 

They reject the idea of race neutral or color blindness as a system of social fairness or equality. 

It is behind the idea of tearing down any monuments, statues or honor to any person who is perceived to have engaged in slavery or possible racism in the past history.

This theory was recently barred from diversity training in the United States Government and Military, by President Trump.

Originally published 10/2/2020

The American people have now become much more aware of this racist propaganda that has contributed to the divisions in the country and increased the feeling of racism in all races. Some states are barring it from education. The Biden administration has doubled down on its teaching in the military, which is now dividing an institution that was a model for diversity.

It is appearing that the goal is drive white's out of positions  of leadership in the military and business. It has already driven most white males out of education.

The end result will likely be a further deterioration of race relations, which is likely the real goal of this hateful propaganda.

How to pay for "Green New Deal", adopt Modern Monetary Theory

NEW DEMOCRATS REJECT CAPITALISM, PLAN NEW ECONOMIC MAGIC

WE HAVE SEEN THIS IDEA BEFORE

New Yorkers are shocked that Amazon has decided to skip coming to New York. Amazon pulled out because of the outrage of the new Democrats that the state had promised them $3 billion of tax incentives to build there. Amazon was expected to spend $27 billion in taxes over the next ten years, and employ 25,000 workers. It seems that Amazon felt it was moving into an unfriendly neighborhood. 

Local New Democrats celebrated and were planning on how they could spend the $3 billion that would not be credited to Amazon. Forget about explaining to them that a credit is not cash to be spent. That would be too deep of a conversation.

Many have asked how the New Democrats plan to pay for all the new spending on healthcare, education, infrastructure and universal income.  They have the answer, "Modern Monetary theory".

In the 1930's the economic debate was between the Keynesian and the Austrian School of economics. The Austrians believed that money was to be an asset that was represented by currency and could be exchanged for goods and services. That governments should have a balanced budget and should not manipulate the economy by debasing the currency. This is of course a simplified explanation.

Keynesian's believed that money did not need to be backed by anything, fiat currency, and the economy could be controlled by raising and lowering interest rates. They in effect changed money from being an asset into being an instrument of government debt. They believed in running deficits to stimulate the economy and raising interest rates to suppress overheating.

Keynesian policy was adopted by Europe and the United States and our currency also became an instrument of government debt rather than an asset. Of course we see that the stimulation through deficits is never slowed by decreased spending. The theory has failed because there is no restraint on government deficits.

Now the New Democrats have embraced the Modern Monetary Theory, which believes that deficits and debt are not relevant nor to be considered. The plan is to control all aspects of the economy by government spending and taxes.

With this theory they can spend on social programs without restraint, debt, deficits and even interest as far as the government is concerned would be eliminated. They also believe that to restrain the economy from overheating, taxes, licenses, fees etc would be raised to restrain inflation and also to target the wealthy to achieve income equality and social justice. They also propose to adopt Asset Taxes, starting with the very wealthy, but as one could imagine it would soon apply to anyone with assets.

This theory is without simple common sense and attempts to defy the laws of simple economics and human nature. Implementing such a policy would destroy the economy in short order. Their policies would force people to shift assets from paper to hard currency and simply shut down much private economic activity.

Of course that is precisely their goal, no private economy, it would be a 100% Government controlled economy which would lead to an economy like Venezuela or Cuba.

originally published 2/21/19

It appears the Biden administration has embraced this theory, with their planned $6 trillion budget, $2 trillion infrastructure and social spending plan. The effect will be the dilution of the value of all paper assets valued in dollars. It will either happen in a slow steady manner or in a giant plunge. It is not a question of if, but when.

Intentional misinformation about taxes paid by rich.

INCLUDING INCREASE IN ASSET VALUES AS INCOME IS  MORE FAKE NEWS

IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF PUSH FOR ASSET TAXES

Propublica recently ran an article claiming that some of the richest Americans paid less than 2 % income tax. This is all a propaganda lie that was repeated by much of the media. What they did was estimate the increase in their assets and it include it as income, this has never been a way that taxes are levied in any country.  They claimed that Warren Buffet paid only .1% tax, but in reality he paid 19% . They claimed Jeff Bezos paid .98% when he paid 24%. and Elon Musk paid 30% not the 3.3 % claimed by Propublica. 

How would you like to be paying taxes on the increase in value of your home, 401K, money saved or any other asset that may have increased in value in the last year. 

First of all, all these increases are subjective, who is going to determine the value of your assets? A government assessor and then you would have to contest or appeal their findings.  What if the value declines ? Are you going to be able to get a rebate or credit? 

Increase in stock values are never taxes until actually realized by a sale. Then there is a capital gain tax. It is interesting that capital losses can only be deducted from other income by a maximum of $3000. a year. That applies to you if you suffer a loss of capital assets and to Elon Musk who could easily have a loss in tens of billions. 

So I am sure this is the beginning of a campign to tax the assets of the richest Americans. Remember when the income tax was instated in 1913, it was 1% on incomes over 20,000. equivalent to $440,000 today up to 6% on incomes over 500,000,  which was equivalent to $11 million We now have rates as high as 36%. 

Beware, if we ever begin taxing assets it will be a nightmare of assessments, appeals and paperwork to determine the value of these assets. It will of course be initially levied on the so called rich and grow annually until anyone who has assets will be deemed to be rich.

You can expect a huge shift from any paper assets to things you can hide in your basement.

You can expect a huge increase in IRS enforcement to handle all new regulations.

Of course those who have no assets will all be in favor, hoping to profit from the redistribution. We can expect, if ever implemented, it will result in everyone becoming poorer.

Obama's political race strategy is now permanent.

 DEMOCRATS HAVE NOW EMBRACED THE IDEA THAT THEY CAN WIN WITHOUT WHITE MALE VOTES

MOVES FROM NOT APPEALING TO DEMONIZING

During the 2012 presidential campaign the Obama campaign admitted that they felt they could win the election without the support of white male voters. They focused their campaign on a  high turnout among blacks, young white women, the LGBT community, immigrants and the traditional union and government  workers. That strategy has now evolved into not just ignoring white male voters but those voters are now labeled as the enemies of democracy. We see a continual focus of the Biden administration and its supporters in the media that white people are the enemy of all things fair and moral.

The basis of their political focus is that white males have suppressed women, blacks, immigrants, gays and any other group that they can exploit to win votes and gain power. It is amazing, when the power structure of the democrat party and the media is made up predominantly of white males. 

Today, all policy, all focus is on racial division. It is primarily using white males as foil's to enhance the democrat political power. It is the age old strategy of encouraging a feeling of victimhood on any group that feels under represented or not enjoying the same economic success as others. While this may be a short term successful strategy, what will be the long term consequences of this strategy? Will this strategy really bring a better economic or social position for their favored victims?

We have seen the me-to movement which has encouraged severe penalties on any male that has offended  female employees. While we know that many of these complaints are justified it has been used mainly against white males to the point that even accusations are cause of permanent destruction. Will this attitude, in the long run, really improve the lot of working women, or will it discourage any mentoring or personal interaction between the sexes in the work place. Safest strategy for a white male is to not ever be alone with a female co-worker in or out of the workplace.

While black employees have made inroads into power positions in business, the present climate has made any unscripted or personal relationship less likely. It may be best to stick to strickly business and avoid any conversation that will result in legal or an HR situation. I do believe racial relations are not improving but deteriorating. In fact, both races may be considering segregation a safer option for the future.

At the same time, we see the increase of incentives to become dependent on government programs and and avoid becoming part of the economy.  This has been a tried and possibly successful strategy of the democrats for decades, but it has now been taken to the next level. Under the guise of searching for economic equality, will handouts and promising sustenance benefit the lives of those who take advantage of these benefits? Or will it just sentence a new generation of victims to be convinced that their status is just a symptom of white suppression?

It seems any destruction that is necessary for the increase of political power and control is just collateral damage in the quest for the new America.