Friday, April 29, 2011

Carrion On



With all of the hubbub over Barack Obama's alleged birth certificate, the mainstream media has largely overlooked all of the latest good economic news for America. Assuming that, like a buzzard, your definition of "good" is synonymous with "sun-baked, maggot-infested roadkill."

The International Monetary Fund has just announced that they expect America's declining economy to take a backseat to that of China in just 5 years. The implications are huge and are well summarized by saying that, in an economic sense, the "Age of America" will be over on the world stage.

Combine that with Standard & Poor's recent decision to downgrade America's economic outlook from "Stable" to "Negative," and say there's a 1-in-3 chance that the United States will lose its AAA borrowing rating within 2 years.

Economic growth has dropped to 1.8% and inflation is rising, causing the cost of everything to rise.

Meanwhile, the actual value of the dollar drops every day while Tim Geithner keeps the printing presses busy spitting out imaginary money and shrugs off the insanity of raising the debt ceiling yet again.

So now that Barack Obama has produced proof of citizenship, we think America is overdue to see him produce some proof of leadership.

But despite the maggot-infested roadkill, we won't be holding our breath.
-

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

Shouldn't the Vultures be eating Obama since he is dead inside. They won't find much to eat since he has no soul, no brain and his "manhood" is smaller then a cocktail weeny.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Yes, the whole BCert thing was designed to be a distraction from the economy, etc (see rant from yesterday)
What a turd herder.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

If we can just keep reminding people that the average price for a gallon of gas was $1.84 the day President Turd-herder (thanks, Pete) took office, and combine that fact with general inflation, no jobs and higher taxes promised, well...Christmas of 2012 may be merry after all. As for the buzzards, let's see to it there are plenty of Democrat carcasses on which they can feed - politically speaking, that is.

Chuck said...

The damage has already been done, and they aren't finished doing more, either. I'm not sure that 2012 won't be too late, and when the necessary fixes cause the flow of money to the leaches to dry up, it will be easy to motivate them to go to the polls in 2014 to regain socialist control of the house (and possibly the senate). The 2 intervening years will not be near enough to fix the existing problems ... and whatever has gotten fixed will be broken again.

Apparently, I'm not feeling very optimistic today. Sorry. While I do think I see a light at the end of the tunnel, I can't help the feeling that it is attached to a freight train that is heading straight at us ... at full speed.

Jim Hlavac said...

On a hopeful note, China isn't going to do all that well either -- for if we tank, they tank. We buy their stuff, and if we stop, well then... The problem with the IMF report is that it looks at an aggregate number - GDP and China has been notorious about their funny numbers. I mean, would you trust a communist government to give real figures? They have to give rosy numbers, or their people would rise up too. Oh that's right, Xinhua, the Chinese news agency admits to several thousands of demonstrations against the government annually, many violent to the point of burning police stations. Their currency is pegged to ours -- ours goes down, so does theirs. Sure, they hold a lot of our debt, not a majority, but a lot, and if the debt can't be paid back, then what? Well, that all can be argued.

But the big problem is China's one-child policy which has led to the weird situation that there's some 140 boys for every 100 girls (in some provinces it approaches 200 boys for every girl.) And those 40 extra guys are going to be mighty ornery (and horny, too,) and what are they going to do? Why, riot, of course.

Not to mention that not all the "Chinese" are Chinese at all -- Tibet, Uigher, etc etc -- who all want out of China. And so what may well happen is that China will implode. Shiny skyscrapers, many 1/2 empty still, in the coastal cities, hides some real problems that the IMF report ignores. (Sorry to sound so optimistic, but it's what keeps me going.)

John the Econ said...

But Jim, there are some upsides to the progressive narrative which is based mostly upon myth. For one thing, once America is no longer the world's political, economic or military superpower, how can we be expected to the the world's police force, welfare sow, or chief climate destroyer? We can just sit back and relax, and be like western Europe; let China do all the globe's heavy lifting. After all, isn't that the whole point of the Obama/Progressive agenda?

Atlas is about to really shrug...

Pete(Detroit) said...

Jim - Agreed, Chineese population demographics are "interesting"... I expect importation of women, by encouraging immogratino (if possible), conquest (if necessary), more (and more public) homosexuality (hetero-flexible and bi guys will pair w/ guys, not gals). Women will become valuable commodities, and guys who can't afford one of their own will have to 'share', possibly leading to 'triad' marraiges. And THAT will jack w/ the one couple / one child policy! Do they get to have two, one for each man? Or just the one the woman is allowed?
Girls will become more valuable, and may lead to boys being exposed / abandoned / aborted...
As I said "interesting"
Also, policy has been around for a while, 30 - 40 years? Long enough that most kids have a linear family - two parents, four grandparents. NO Aunts, Uncles, Cousins - those concepts no longer have referent. "Sibling" is word that might be more steeped in shame and illegality than one's crazy uncle kept chained in the basement...

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Readers- I'm enjoying the dialogue here this morning and the interesting takes on China. You're right that there's good reason to be skeptical of "official" statistics which originate there. But then again, I'm pretty suspicious of official statistics which originate here. I believe that many of Obama's financial projections (for budgets, Obamacare, etc) include the assumption that our economy will be growing at 4-5% instead of the 1.8% we actually have. And of course, the CBO is forced to compute budgets based on whatever fantasies are presented to them by the politicians ("Okay, assume that doctors will happily accept another 20% pay cut with no adverse consequences...")

Regarding the lack of women in China, it seems to me that we have a huge surplus of unwed mothers in this country. They're single and fertile, which should be an irresistible combination. Surely a deal can be worked out. Maybe Donald Trump can handle it!

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Pete:
During WWII the Japanese "conscripted" thousands of Chinese young women to work at "comfort stations", serving the carnal needs of Japanese soldiers. Also, the "rape of Nanking" was pretty literal. Who's to say turnabout isn't fair play to the Chinese mind. Don't tell me there isn't lingering hatred of the Japanese in many parts of China and that some Chinese bureaucrat hasn't thought along those lines.

Doktor Paulie said...

Sticking China with the work and the blame would be great, except we'd first have to convince the radical moosleems that the Chinese are the Great Satan and not us anymore. Otherwise, they just rejoice in our weakness and carry out worse attacks. While there's breath in our lungs we carry the message the jihadis can not tolerate. So unless we'd like to take a few tens of millions of unnecessary casualties, we have to keep up the pressure on the radicals and their supporters. Which means we are going to continue to do the heavy lifting and take all the baloney from the world's morons, willing dupes, fools, and enemies of all that's good. And what do WE care what such specimens think anyway?

Pete(Detroit) said...

AHD - Full agreed. One reason American cars sell so well in China is that Japanese are not allowed.

Stilt - we could probably pay off a large part of the Chinese held debt w/ single Moms - if we could convince 'em to go. Dunno if cutting off all aid would be sufficient or not...

Doktor P - The question remains, at what point do the 'producers' quit supporting the 'parasites', and how do we rid ourselves of them? Soylent Green is not a particularly "palatable" option, to me...

Jim Hlavac said...

@Pete(Detroit) -- the idea that the extra guys in China will go gay depends on your view if being gay is not innate, and really just a "choice" -- either for fun, or through the "force" of no girls (the prison model, I guess.) Or if being gay is simply a weird little natural blip like say, oh, autism, with an unvarying percentage among the general population. I'm inclined toward the innate autistic side of things, having never made the "choice" myself, and there being plenty of ladies whom have sought my attention to no avail. I've never met the hetero guy without a girlfriend for awhile who goes gay for jollies, that's for sure. It's just not their nature.

On the other hand, China has begun a crack down on gay bars, raiding and arresting everyone inside -- weirdly, they blame religion and capitalism on the "problem." So if the guys "go" gay, well, then, the prisons will be full, and that should put a crimp in their plans too.

@Stilt -- the unwed mothers still, of course, have unwed fathers hanging around. And if we ship China all these, um, ladies, then we'll have all those randy lonesome men here. And since the unwed moms here tend to be either black or fat or both (see Springer/Povich,) it presupposes that the Chinese gents will go for that sort of gal.

Which is what happens when you fool with mother nature and/or the liberties of people -- it all goes kaflooey. But they're going to have one hell of a "Tea Party" over there, ain't they?

robert said...

Expanding on what Dr. Paulie said, Ive often wondered what would happen if the mooslims did effectively "defeat" the US. It would then seem that a conflict between the Red Chinese and the mooslims is inevitable. They are both so brutal and ruthless it may come down to who can cut off the most heads the fastest.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Jim - I feel that it's an inverted bell curve - most people soundly at the 'gay' end or the straight end, w/ some fewer in the 'mostly gay' or 'mostly straight' parts, and some VERY few in the 'I really don't care' middle. I agree, that what ever your orientation, it's likely hardwired, and trying to 'convert' someone is just damned silly. But the binary 100%gay or 100%straight model just doesn't fit some people I know (one who does, indeed, self identify as "hetero-flexible")

Robert, w/ Each Islamist having up to 4 wives, that would seem to me to be a viable 'recruitment' zone. Some of 'em are darned pretty, too (see current Miss USA, and that one making all the fuss on Playboy Germany)

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Jim Hlavac- Granted many of our unwed mothers don't meet Chinese standards of desirability, which is why each new "bride" will come along with Stevie Wonder-style opaque sunglasses for the groom.

As for the "unmarried fathers," many of them are already enjoying government housing with bars on the windows, and so shouldn't miss women any more than they do already.

@Robert- Red Chinese vs Muslim World. There's a "pay-per-view" match worth seeing.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Stilton:
Sunglasses or beer goggles? Which reminds me... I've had Chinese beer. Doesn't taste so bad but it smells like a skunk peed in a bottle.

JustaJeepGuy said...

One thing to remember about China is, they have ALWAYS preferred having sons rather than daughters. It's a cultural thing, with sons being expected to care for aging parents. If you can only have one child, which are you going to choose? Of course, who cares about the long-term consequences? Life will be interesting in China in a few years...

Doktor Paulie said...

Pete, we are about there now. The socialists have just about run out of other people's money, there are an enormous number of people, even in the unwashed political middle who feel they've been taxed enough already, and the inconvenient truth about all the leftist fantasies keeps slipping out via the internet, cable TV, and talk radio. Results produced by the orgy of spending over the last 45 years have plainly failed to match all the grand promises. People are starting to get impatient with all the baloney. We are in a full-bore civil war of values. The RINO party may need to go the way the Whigs went in the 1850s, and that may give the marxists the chance to win several more elections, but this train will not be stopped. There will always be leeches, but most people are smart enough to realize they can do a lot better for themselves with a little hard work than any government program can. Hunger and envy are amazingly motivating.

Doktor Paulie said...

Oh, and don't forget that all gov't programs are vast flabby bureaucracies. All bureaucracies continuously expand to consume more-and-more resources of every kind, money, people, buildings, time, you-name-it, while simultaneously producing fewer-and-fewer useful results of any sort. Studies, reports and other "documents" are the favorite output of any bureaucracy since, unlike an actual program, they can't be judged to have actually failed. In the end, you could theoretically tax everyone at 100%, turning everybody into leeches, and those leeches would be starving in the cold and the dark because the gov't programs that were supposed to take care of them would be so completely ineffective. Well before then, of course, we'd make use of the 2nd Amendment, and well before THAT, there would be, and will be, a revolution at the ballot box. Which prompts me to remind you all once again that even a little revolution is a very ugly thing. And it's just about time that we HAD one!

pryorguy said...

Do not start believing all the guv statistics they crank out...when does the fed get anything right? And...who knows what will intervene in the meantime to alter the course we are on...maybe for good, maybe otherwise. I agree it looks pretty dire for the good ol USA, but don't give up the ship yet...remember how things have a way of happening out of the blue, and a climate can change almost overnight. God still is in control of everything, if he has a steadfast people to work with. Keep the faith. And if ya got none, git some!

robert said...

Yes Dok, you're right about the bureaucracies, and they reached the point of diminshing returns about 40 years ago, in my estimation.
As far as revolution goes, well, I'm teaching my kids how to shoot. I hope it doesn't get that far, but no point in not being ready for anything. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

george / Alvin,Tx said...

@ robert: teaching your kids to shoot is good! it teaches them how to handle / respect guns, is great for hand-eye coordination, is a skill they can use to provide meat for the table, and, for me, is a great way to relax! you can't properly concentrate on your aim/target without getting everything else out of your mind. and ..... there is that 2nd amendment reason!!

Jim Hlavac said...

@Pete(Detroit) -- thanks so much for that rational take on the issue; truly. I do find it funny though, the term "hetero-flexible" -- perhaps another term for "bisexual" (which we 100% gay joke about "we're not 'buy-sexual' at all; we want it free!) Still, it's the social construct against gays that lead many to be "hetero-flexible." It's safe. I'm met them, they're "straight acting" and have girlfriends, even wives -- but are quite the queens when out with us. Weird. But there's never a "homo-flexible" is there? Weird, too. Not an easy issue, I admit. (BTW, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council did say today that gay folks are "domestic terrorists." Just the worst person imaginable, he called me. See, www.goodasyou.org for the sordid nonsense. Hint to Stilt -- there's a group to cartoon about.)

As for the 2nd Amendment brought up here, well, I can't shoot straight. And I'm frankly rather gun shy. But if it comes to it, I'll be shining up the ammo like you never saw :))

SC said...

@ Chuck, I agree. That’s why we need tax reform right now. A flat tax; no deductions; everyone pays. This way everyone that has an income even if it’s only $1000 you pay your ‘fair share’….skin-in-the-game. (Coincidentally, I do not care what color your skin is – it can be green or blue, whatever as long as you have some in the game). There will probably continue to be leeches on the govt dole. We need to trim the dole down to a ‘safety net’ for those folks that really run into hard times that are not their fault (tornadoes, loss of a job, accidents, flooding, health issues, etc) other than that, the govt should get out of the welfare business & leave it up to private charities. The govt should be running the country; keeping us safe not feeding, sheltering & clothing us. The only way we are going to get electorate to wake up to the rising debt and deficits, etc is for them to pay their fair share and feel it.
@ Jim H – I don’t trust our govt to give us real figures & no way are China’s figures real. Remember the 2008 Olympics when they said their girl gymnasts (that looked 11 or 12) were 16 years old? They’ll lie about anything to make themselves look good. That sounds just like the Dems in Washington.
&JaJG: Sons caring for aging parents in China, whereas here in the US it is mostly done by the daughters (I know not in all cases).

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Readers- I wish I had more time to comment at the moment, but just wanted to give a "thumbs up" to the interesting and dynamic exchange of ideas above.

And it's interesting how today's conversation has evolved from bad economic news (the subject of the cartoon/commentary) to more general discussion of China, "hetero-flexibility," and target practice - and all of it being relevant!

Pete(Detroit) said...

Jim - every welcome. I find it helps to take a rational tone when one hopes to have a rational discussion, glad you found it so. As for polishing the ammo - don't bother - just load it, I'll shoot it - just try to keep up, eh?
((-'pb

James said...

@Jim/Pete: I don't like guns, but I've been thinking about getting one as well. This world, it disappoints me sometimes.

@SC: Nice stuff about that "safety net", I completely agree. Don't the liberals realise that money that goes to the leeches they so adore COULD be going to the people you describe, who actually need/"deserve" it, instead?

Anyway! If I could rant for a moment. They just hit me below the belt, everybody. Superman is no longer an american citizen.

...this is wrong on so many levels. Why are so many people ashamed and afraid of patriotism? Superman was always intended to be a leftist, borderline socialist fairy-tale, but dammit, he was still a patriotic icon, an american hero. And now that's gone, because a bunch of HACKS working in the SHELL of a once great company are trying to shroud their impotence with a cheap, liberal-pleasing, anti-american GIMMICK. These morons, have they ever even READ the old stories? Do they UNDERSTAND the subject material they are writing for at ALL? Oh, it makes it more realistic, is that it? Of course, our fairy tales must be realistic, especially if the version of pseudo-realism their hack writers choose caters to the PC, anti-american left.

ARGGGGHHHH.

I think I might... write an angry letter. Never done that before! But this, this hit close to home.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@James- The story about Superman renouncing his American citizenship sorely tempts me to break my "weekend retrospective" policy and come up with a new cartoon for Saturday.

When I was a kid (and the world a cooling ball of gas), EVERY show directed at kids had strong, consistent moral messages. Superman, Roy Rogers, the Lone Ranger, Mickey Mouse Club, and on and on. But what do kids (and for that matter, adults) get these days? 17 flavors of "Law and Order" or "CSI" in which the bad guy is always a conservative moneygrubber or a lunatic Christian. Sitcoms display idiotic adult models and alleycat morals.

Darn, now I want to write an angry letter, too! I wonder if the Daily Planet will publish it...?

Pete(Detroit) said...

James - Full agree on Superman
In Re "guns" - they're just tools, like a chainsaw. They can kill, just like a chainsaw. They can save your life, just like a chainsaw.
In the hands of someone who doesn't know anything about them, they are a danger to everyone, just like a chainsaw.
IF you decide to get one, PLEASE get some training. These guys are good... (for rifles, anyway) and there's probably a meet up not too far from you, where EVER you live.. (and they're pretty good about loaners for newbies..)

http://www.appleseedinfo.org/

Just sayin'...
And Apols, Stilt for pimping another group on your site, but it seemed apropo the discussion - and they are a decent sort...(InMyArrogantOpinion)

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Pete(Detroit)- Hey, you're not pimping, you're sharing. Not long ago, I had a friend take me out to a gun range for my first-ever experience with a handgun. And it pretty much scared the crap out of me. I'd fired a .22 rifle several times in the past, and so sort of expected a "pop-pop" experience. But noOOooo. It was KABLAM!!! and a shockwave that traveled through my body...and that's when I was standing behind my friend as he fired.

Clearly, training is essential in knowing what you're doing, and getting rid of the fear factor. And if you don't have training, then fear (translated into healthy respect) is certainly the right reaction.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Stilt - Thanx.
Reminds of the first time a friend of mine fired my .40 - "This isn't going to knock me on my ass, is it?" "No, you're fine"
**BLAMMM!!!**
Two steps back..
>outraged< - "You said this wasn't going to knock me on my ASS!!!"
"What, you're still standing..."
She now carries a snub .38 that kicks like a mule, and a Ruger LCP that I will not fire - it friggin' HURTS.
Otoh, my 6.5" .357mag shoots like butter - but it weighs 3.5lb....
ANYWAY point being that guns that are 'easy' to carry are NOT easy to shoot, and v/va..
and .22 rifles are VERY easy to learn to shoot
and cheap
and can feed you
And yes, when in doubt, "healthy respect" is a good thing.
Firearms (either long or short) and alcohol mix perfectly fine in precisely ONE direction - First the Plinking, THEN the Drinking
Also - is it ALWAYS loaded - there is (almost) NO such thing as "accidental discharge" - 999 times out of 1000, there was a finger on the trigger...
Just sayin'...
(yeah, basic stuff, but not everyone may have heard it, so say it EVERY time)

JustaJeepGuy said...

@James said:
"Don't the liberals realise that money that goes to the leeches they so adore COULD be going to the people you describe, who actually need/"deserve" it, instead?"

The money that goes to the leeches is for the purchase of the leeches' votes. The liberals who give the money out couldn't care less about "helping" anyone, they simply want the votes of those leeches. And, since that money isn't enough to let someone live really well, it shows just how inexpensive those voters are. And why the liberals care so little for them.