Carbon tax, also known as the latest means devised by globalists to gain near-total control over the economies of the world.
In the end, any such tax would effectively just be a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich, technologically elite oligarchs.
And, think about it—supposing the tax were wildly successful at cutting carbon dioxide emissions, what would happen? Governments will have become reliant on a dying revenue stream, at which point they will shift to a new tax, probably one that will just tax all energy consumption directly.
Look at what is happening with electric cars. Governments lost revenue from gasoline taxes, and so now they are trying to substitute per-mile or per-kilometer taxes instead. Meanwhile, those same government leaders fail to build enough energy plants to fuel the new electric boom. The globalist elites are intentionally creating shortages, and they are finding every way possible to profit from it, all at our expense.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
When every day is an emergency, then no day is an emergency. The government has to be highly selective with emergency declarations for them to be remotely effective. If the government declares emergencies needlessly or lets them continue far past a reasonable expiration date, people will effectively void the declaration anyway by ignoring it and simply going about their lives.
Are health services caught up so that there is ample capacity in the system? If so, then new cases are low. The emergency is already over.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
You would deny yourself a blood transfusion if you required or an emergency vaccination in an ER?
If that blood were made from parts harvested from aborted babies, then, yes, I imagine that quite a number of people would refuse to pollute themselves with it, even in dire emergencies.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
If you bought $10,000 worth of gold ten years ago, and sold it today, you'd now have $10,000. Minus fees, taxes, and then inflation has eaten 30% of the value of that $10k. Gold is dead.
On the other hand, if you bought gold twelve years ago, you’ve nearly doubled your investment. And singling out gold for fees and taxes is nonsense. Capital gains taxes apply to stocks and gold alike. With stocks, you’re mostly locked in to using a broker. With gold, you have options to buy and sell privately without any fees.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Good to see that the sovereign citizen movement has long, deep roots in Japan. Right to freely travel and all that…
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
Want to be middle management? An MBA is a fast track to that. Want anything more? It’s more likely a graveyard.
An MBA teaches one how to think like everyone else, or at least how the self-professed experts think everyone should think. It’s training that more often boxes people in than opens doors to top opportunities.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Burnout is and always has been an issue in nursing. What this article utterly fails to acknowledge? Currently, large numbers of nurses who are otherwise willing to work are quitting en masse because of mandates that they get the COVID jab. When about a third of the workforce has refused to get the shot thus far and then is threatened with termination for not taking the shot, surprise! Lots quit.
-1 ( +5 / -6 )
The elephants in the room ignored by this academic: Nikki Minaj and the fact that (deeply Democratic) blacks have the lowest COVID jab rate in America.
Not that I blame them. Generations of scientists and governments using people as guinea pigs is a legit reason to reject “science.”
6 ( +7 / -1 )
Try reading Coetzee‘s Waiting for the Barbarians. One of the salient points in that novel is that torture isn’t ever about getting the truth. It is only about exercising power and inducing fear. Coetzee wrote in the context of South African apartheid. A torture victim could confess to anything, true or untrue, but the point is that the person broke, the person confessed to something against his will, the person bent to the power held over him.
Or think of Picard in Star Trek. How many lights are there? The point of torture was to provoke a confession to a lie.
One can prattle all day about rule of law from a Western liberal perspective, but that concept is already rejected out of hand by a regime that tortures. Undermining a concept that they already reject might be seen as a plus.
-4 ( +1 / -5 )
Both are -isms, which means that they are both beliefs or ideologies. Neither is a set of actions per se, but both can be used to justify or promote particular acts or courses of action.
“Patriot,” from Latin pater, or father. “National,” from Latin natus, or birth.
Thus one is belief in the land of one’s father (ancestors); the other is belief in the land of one’s birth. Not a terribly sharp distinction, is it?
In modern political parlance, as typically used by a politician, the two words are distinguished in this manner:
Patriotism: when people act on love of country in a way that promotes my political agenda.
Nationalism: when people act on love of country in a way that runs counter to my political agenda.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
No person should ever be forced (or incentivized) to reveal personal medical information to strangers in order to carry out interactions necessary to daily life.
12 ( +16 / -4 )
A generation ago, the event was called the Special Olympics, and it was about friendship and participation. There were no medals tables or endorsement deals.
Now, it’s the Paralympics, and it’s about winning and money.
There is ultimately no way to make the Paralympics “fair.” No two disabilities are exactly the same. Every disability requires custom accommodation. No matter how the Paralympics group competitors, there will be some who are near the top end of their class and others at the bottom end.
And as long as there is financial incentive (in the form of bonuses, support, or endorsements), there will be incentive to get oneself classified as favorably as possible. As long as the Paralympics focus on competition and money, there is no way to fix this.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
Hushed reverence? Why not instead show the photo of Biden checking his watch during the ceremony to see how much longer before he could leave? Do they mean that reverence?
Austin, Milley, Blinken, and Biden all there together. It’s a who’s who of the Afghanistan debacle. What accountability are these four going to face for their incompetence?
1 ( +6 / -5 )
What is a conspiracy? Two or more people secretly use influence to manipulate events in their favor. In other words, conspiracy is the stuff of history. The full story is almost never told the first, second, or third time around. People who crave power have an interest in keeping their conspiracies hidden.
Take America’s entry into WWI and the sinking of the Lusitania, for example. The government and historians long treated the torpedoing of the Lusitania as a dastardly, unprovoked attack on an innocent civilian passenger liner.
Eighty years later, when a submersible found the shipwreck, a different story emerged. An entire deck of the ship had been loaded with munitions bound for Britain. Germany had knowledge of this and tried to take out advertisements in every major newspaper in the Northeast, warning people not to board the ship because it was being used to ferry munitions and would be targeted by U-boats. J.P. Morgan, who had a financial stake in the munitions shipment and who strongly wanted the U.S. to enter the war, suppressed these ads in nearly every paper. The ship sailed with most of the American public oblivious.
The British, for their part, gave the Lusitania a destroyer escort for the first part of the voyage. Then they pulled off the escort and directed the Lusitania to sail through waters in which a U-boat has been spotted only a day or two earlier. The ship was sunk, and Wilson used this as a pretext to drag America to war.
If one had said in 1918 that J.P. Morgan and the American and British governments conspired to set up the Lusitania disaster and hide the truth from the public, one would have been called a “loony, fringe conspiracy theorist,” or whatever the equivalent of that in the parlance of the time. For decades, the U.S. government resolutely claimed there were no munitions on board. That was finally proven a lie. The conspiracy theorists had told the more accurate version of history.
Moving backward and forward in history, how often has this been the case, that conspiracy theories approximated the truth far more accurately than the official accounts?
7 ( +7 / -0 )
There was talk of UBI long before the pandemic, and a few places had experimented with it. As with many things, craven politicians have used COVID as an excuse to advance policies that otherwise would have had zero chance of public acceptance. Never let a virus…err…crisis go to waste, as they say.
3 ( +15 / -12 )
Posted in: In many countries, including Japan, local and state governments are offering cash, gift coupons and other incentives to encourage people who are reluctant to be vaccinated against the coronavirus to do so? Do you think this is a good idea? See in context
If people aren’t getting the shot because of an allergy, then the incentive isn’t going to change this. Giving an incentive that isn’t available to those few people almost seems discriminatory.
If people aren’t getting the shot because of ethical reasons, such as because of how the vaccines are produced, incentives aren’t going to persuade them.
If people aren’t getting the shot because they believe it might kill, sterilize, or otherwise physically harm them, then very few of these people will weigh any incentive greater than their own health.
In the end, the government is just giving away freebies to people who were planning to get the shot anyway.
2 ( +6 / -4 )
The science doesn’t fit your narrative, so you find reasons to filter it out, eh, virusrex? Yes, the study is a preprint, but that’s science today. Most is put online as preprints before reaching full publication. That alone is not grounds to dismiss the findings.
The study is by professional researchers at Carnegie Mellon and Pittsburg, and they did weight the findings, dot their i’s and cross their t’s. Inventing an explanation that anti-vaxxers lie on research surveys without a shred of evidence is downright unscientific on your part. “It’s not an impossible thing to assume” is anti-scientific posturing on your part.
This study also echoes other pre-COVID research finding high vaccine hesitancy among certain high-education and high-income demographics. “Vaccines cause autism” did not originate or initially gain traction among minorities or the uneducated. It was a lot of upper middle-class people circulating those claims.
At this moment, the best evidence we have indicates that in January of this year, those with less than a high school education and those with Ph.D.s were among the most vaccine hesitant. By May, other groups had softened toward the COVID shots. Ph.D.s hadn’t, and they are now the least likely demographic to choose to get the shots. Until you can offer legitimate evidence showing a flaw in their data, you’re merely doing exactly what you accuse anti-vaxxers of doing.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
It’s curious how many posters here describe vaccine skeptics as “ignorant” and “uneducated.” Data from a couple weeks ago in the U.S. showed that the least vaccinated group by educational level is people with Ph.D.s. That upends the simplistic labeling we see from many people here.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
Once a kid is done with their classes for the day and outside of the school property the school has no right to say or do anything about what a student says or does.
It’s ironic that this perspective is posted on a Japanese news site. In Japan, schools consider themselves responsible for kids 24/7. They make all kinds of rules about when and where kids can ride bikes, what times they have to be home, etc. This court case is from the U.S., but, like it or not, Japan takes radically different views on the authority of schools and the rights and privacy of kids and families.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Reducing the number of lawmakers?
So you mean making them less representative and less connected to the people in their local districts? Fewer lawmakers simply means that money interests can buy influence by controlling fewer people. Fewer unelected bureaucrats, maybe. Fewer elected representatives? Not convinced.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Gun numbers increased in the U.S. for decades, while crime steadily fell. Then, in the last year of the Trump administration, crime started to rise in association with protests which, in part, were protesting Biden’s 1994 crime bill. That violence has continued to rise, largely in heavily Democratic urban centers, as lockdowns lift, in no small part because the protests convinced various mayors and city councils to defund and/or revamp their police departments. Effective policing was thrown out the window, and rising violence and crime is the obvious consequence.
Good luck to Biden and Democrats trying to fix the problem. It’s largely one of their own creation, with obvious solutions, except that Democrats are ideologically and politically hamstrung by progressives from adopting those obvious solutions.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
Your claims about Japan’s failure to surrender are historically false. Japan tried to open peace negotiations as early as 1942, but Hopkins and Marshall on the U.S. side refused. They wanted a protracted, destructive war that would allow the Soviets and U.S. to carve out their respective spheres on influence in Asia.
In July 1945, Japan offered a peace deal in which the only significant stipulation was the the emperor would be retained as a figurehead. Again, the U.S. refused, which is especially bizarre given that the U.S. promptly installed the emperor as a figurehead as soon as the war ended.
The war between Japan and America could have ended months, if not years, earlier but for America’s determination to make it last longer. America wanted to drop the atomic bombs. America and the Soviet Union had long before set the date by which Stalin would declare war against Japan, and the U.S. ensured the war did not ended before that date.
If there is blame for allowing the Soviets to blitz Japanese-controlled areas in the last few days of the war, that blame falls squarely on the U.S., which had every opportunity to end the war long before.
9 ( +9 / -0 )
While the article starts off talking about air rifles, and limits on air pistol ownership, I think they're talking about the issues for other types of shooting events when they talk about limitations on ammunition.
I’d not be at all surprised if a journalist unfamiliar with shooting conflated two things. It wouldn’t be the first time. A strict limitation on inert pellets seems nonsensical. Very likely, the bigger problems and strict limits are with shotguns for the skeet shooting events.
5 ( +5 / -0 )
So if Olympic competition is held at a venue in Tokyo, the authorities are already bending the rules just to permit that.
The shooting venue is at Asaka, the same location as in 1964, on the SDF base, where presumably those city/civilian gun rules don’t normally apply.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Just put a muzzle velocity limitation on air-rifles to make them safer.
This isn’t a solution for competitive shooting. Lower muzzle velocity changes the accuracy and aiming. It also would require every shooter in the world to completely refit their gear for Japan, after which the rules revert to normal.
The problem is not one of safety. Nobody has ever been shot and killed by an air rifle at the Olympics. To limit harm from accidents among the general public, yes, lower muzzle velocity might have an effect, but only in a country where the general public has access to pellet guns. People in Japan don’t, and there are zero problems with people getting shot by air rifles.
Besides, even if muzzle velocity were lowered, the guns and pellets would still be highly regulated by Japan. It’s not a question of safety, but of regulation. Japan has rules that it won’t bend or amend, even in a situation where the rules make no sense and no possible harm could come from making an exception.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Too many commenters here blindly assume that the reason raising kids is perceived as difficult is lack of government money and support and that the solution is as simple as more government money and support. It’s not.
A quick look at birth rates in other industrialized countries shows that this is true. Japan is not unique in facing a lack of children. It’s poor countries with fewer resources that are having more children. Many wealthy countries are only avoiding Japan’s population free-fall by importing people from poorer countries where more kids are the norm. No amount of government money thrown as this problem is going to solve it because it’s not a money problem.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
“We totally screwed up this pandemic, but please give us more money and power! We promise to do better next pandemic!”
WHO sounds as tone deaf now as they were January a year ago.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
A constitution exists to prevent government overreach during times of emergency, not to enable the government to strip away rights whenever a difficult situation arises. Japan’s constitution (and virtually every constitution worldwide) already grants broad powers for the government to respond to emergencies. Japan has done vastly better than countries in Europe or states in the U.S. that enacted strict lockdowns. If the government claims to need more powers, there is some other agenda at work.
5 ( +5 / -0 )
They talk about vaccine passports before they can even properly organize their own vaccine rollout.
Not ironic. The response to the virus from governments around the world has, from the start, largely been more about how to increase government power and reach than it was about public health. Vaccine passports are the power mechanism, so of course government officials think of that first. The passport idea was floated in other countries before vaccines became available, too.
1 ( +4 / -3 )