CDC makes it official: most births in the U.S. now are not non-white

Under the bribem regime CDC wouldn't tell the truth for any price.  (Example: "Duh vaccine is 'safe and effective,' when it was neither--and they knew it.  We have the emails.)

But now for some reason the CDC seems to be a LOT more forthcoming.  (Gee, what could possibly have cause THAT to change, eh?)

SO...the CDC just released a study tracking 33 million births in the U.S., and found...wait for it...a majority of the births were to minorities.

Typical voter: "So what?  Whites are a minority in the U.S. and have been for years, so it's no surprise that most births are to non-white mothers.  So chill, deplorable!"

Except that's horseshit.  Official census estimates are that in 2024 non-Hispanic whites were likely between 56% and 58% of the population.  That's a drop from a measured 61.6% in the 2020 census--so in just four years.

And in 2010, 72.4% identified as "white only."  So it's dropped from 72.4% to 56% in just 14 years.

(Interestingly, bribem's damn Census Bureau says that between 2010 and 2020 the percentage of whites dropped 8.6% .  But AI said the drop was from 72.4% to 56%, which is NOT 8.6% or even close, but is 16.4%.  And even the Census Bureau report itself said 72.4% in 2010 and 61.6% in 2020, which is 10.8%, NOT 8.6%.  
  It's not possible to get a straight answer out of these people.  And you can guess why.)

So even though whites remain the largest racial group (56%), the percentage is dropping like a rock, for two reasons:  First is the number of immigrants, both legal and a much larger number of illegals.

But second is that minorities are having lots more kids than whites.  Shockingly, the "total fertility rate" for white women--the average number of children a woman has in her lifetime--is now down to about 1.4, far below the 2.02 needed to keep the number of whites constant.

There are a number of reasons for this:  First, for the last 30 years feminists have been saying that an exciting career in corporate America is far more exciting and rewarding than having kids, so naturally many American girls--especially those with liberal parents--absolutely ate it up.
  Second, for at least 40 years the communist-run schools (yes, they are) have been teaching kids that America has always been evil and raaaaacist, built on stolen land, etc.  That message--endlessly repeated by university professors and the "elite" Mainstream Media--sinks in: who would want to perpetuate an allegedly evil race, eh?

Third:  For 40 years feminists have been bleating that "Men are oppressors!"  Anyone see "The Handmaid's Tale"?  Who in their right mind would marry an "oppressor," eh?

Fourth: Liberals/Democrats/socialists have rammed thru hundreds of laws at the federal level alone that give women everything husbands once did: mainly money and some degree of protection.  Men once led families, but as government has taken on that role, women think "Why should I have to negotiate with a husband who may try to keep me from do whatever I want, when if I'm single I can do whatever I want without having to negotiate about it?" 
   Ohhh absolutely, comrade!  Why put up with the hassle of negotiating with a dim-wit man when duh gummint will give you whatever you need?  AND you can have an exciting, high-paying job as a corporate exec, eh?

The dim-wit husband with the so-clever wife has been a staple of TV ads for decades.  It's become a cliche, just as mixed couples and gays started becoming a cliche a couple of years ago.  This may have been designed to hook women customers, but it has the inevitable effect of denigrating men and (heterosexual) marriage.

Fifth: for decades liberal judges in the leftist-dominated court system (calling it "our justice system" seems laughable on so many levels) have delighted in making lavish alimony and property awards to ex-wives in divorces.  Say, d'ya think men with at least an average IQ, seeing this happen over and over, might think "I don't ever wanna be forced by some pencil-neck liberal judge to give 80% of my income to my ex-wife."
  Just kidding: the only men who ever think about such possibilities are lawyers for the rich, and they settle that with a pre-nup.  Your average working stiff never thinks to do that, and most couldn't afford it anyway.

Finally, for the past 30 years the communists and the Mainstream Media have been screaming that duh Erf is warming--at a dangerous and totally unprecedented level!  And they claim the cause is a deadly poison gas called "carbon dioxide."  Just kidding: CO2 isn't poisonous at all--you exhale it with every breath.  But they say it's gon' kill all life on Erf reel soon.  Or maybe later, but still dead!

Okay, what's the relevance?  It's that Americans produce lots more CO2 per person than the rest of the world, because we drive cars and burn natural gas to produce electricity and heat our homes.  So communists and "wokiez" scream that Americans are causing most of this added, allegedly deadly warming.  

The wokiez say the only way to slow down the deadly (?) warming is for the people who use more energy per person to have fewer kids.  And that, deplorable white American, would be you.

Now, if a girl hears--from age 5 to menopause-- that her country bears most of the blame for the claimed end of life on duh Erf, do you stupidly think this will have NO EFFECT AT ALL on her willingness to have children?

If you're a Democrat, your answer is "None at all."

If you're a so-called "independent" you hedge by saying "Well it might have a slight effect, but too small to measure."

Ohhh, that's good.  Nuance, comrade.

Liberals and Democrats will argue that none of the things above are true.  [Really?] 

"Okay, maybe they might be true, but they can't possibly have caused such a huge drop in the white 'fertility rate' or whatever you claim it was!

Okay, liberal shitheads, YOU try to explain it.

Knock yourselves out.  You and your fellow Dems and communists endlessly, relentlessly pushed ALL this shit, and white women ate it up.

Here's the fun part for me, because I've been predicting the future on this blog since 2003 and I'm damn good at it:  The U.S.--at least as those around my age have known it--is doomed.  Not by Climate Change, but by Democrat policies.  And by the fact that Democrat voters will always vote for the party that promises to give them more money.

The pols vote to give 'em more money to keep their supporters turning out to vote for 'em/

As a result, at some point the interest on our vast national debt will be adding not just a trillion a year, but five trillion a year to our debt.  (As all of you undoubtedly knew, interest payments just this year will be over a TRILLION dollars.)
  When lenders stop lending, pols will keep things going for another year by simply faking the money.  The joke used to be printing stacks of $100-dollar bills, but now it's just touching a key on a computer to re-fill every EBT card with fictitious numbers--including billions for illegals.
  That will last for a few months, and then it's war.  The hordes will pour out of the cities, stripping farms clean.  Lack of fertilizer, seeds and diesel for tractors will cause food production to plummet.  Invaluable dairy cows will be slaughtered for meat instead of being protected for their ability to turn cellulose (which humans can't digest) into milk.

If you've got highschool-age kids, ask 'em if humans can digest cellulose.

I don't have kids, so when the shooting starts I won't care.  You morons brought this on yourselves.  Some of us knew what would happen--what HAD to happen if you got your way.  But either you were too dense to understand simple English, or like the communists and Democrats, you wanted to destroy the U.S. or capitalism or Trump or all three. 

Now let's return to that "new" CDC report that the majority of births in the U.S. are now minorities. If you wanna see the future, click on this link.  It's to an ABC TV station in LA, which is 30% illegals now.  If they haven't taken down the comments, the number of comments from invaders laughing, sneering "We won" will amaze you.  Should scare you, but if you're a Democrat you'll welcome your new rulers.  You'll toast their victory.  It's exactly what you want, what you've worked tirelessly for.

Well maybe you didn't exactly want it, but you always voted for the Democrat candidate, who sure as hell wanted it, was absolutely working to get it.

And maybe it's not exactly what you wanted, but for a few years it'll be fine.

Your children will be good leftists, just like you, but they'll be white.  And just before your children are executed for some made-up "crime" against the New Non-white State, they just might realize who really caused their deaths. 

https://www.instagram.com/abc7la/p/DUMAzjFEwZB/

Liberal woman who was gang-raped refused to report the crime, because...uh...

For the last year we've been seeing liberal women demanding that illegal aliens not be deported.  Conservatives ask "Even if they're rapists and killers?"  The response--always-- is "Most undocumented immigrants are fine." 

But many aren't, and since most of the victims are women and girls, screaming to keep ALL of them here--including the rapists and murderers--seems highly irrational, eh?

Then you realize: a huge percentage of liberal women are totally irrational.

Ah, you think that's an absurd claim?  Keep reading:

In 2021 a female PhD candidate--Anna Krauthamer--was gang-raped--but didn't report the attack because (wait for it)...she doesn't believe the rapists should go to prison.  Seriously.

She even published an essay explaining her decision, saying she didn't report it because she wished it had never happened [how is that a rational reason?], and believed imprisoning her rapists would do nothing for her.

Obviously prosecuting her attackers and sending 'em to prison for a decade wouldn't change the fact that she'd been gang-raped, but putting the thug rapists in prison for a decade would obviously prevent them from attacking some other unfortunate female for that period, eh?

But Krauthamer either refuses to see the logic of that, or doesn't see any benefit.  'Why should I care if these same thugs gang-rape some other girl?  After all, that doesn't affect ME.'

She wrote, "How silly and strange it would be to have a group of people incarcerated when that would do nothing to fix the damage they've already done."

Obviously can't change the past, but putting her rapists in prison would obviously prevent 'em from raping other girls while they were locked up.  But Krauthamer refuses to do that.  Reminds me of DA's who refuse to prosecute, or judges who release known thugs instantly, without bail.  "He a guuud boy, surely won't hurt anyone while he's free on the streets!"

Moronic liberals.  Thugs don't change overnight.  It takes years for 'em to see the error of their ways.  And some clearly never do.

Krauthamer--who's been a "prison abolitionist" for years--said friends urged her to report the assault, arguing that sending her rapists to prison would protect other women, but she refused.

She wrote "I don’t want to ruin the lives of my rapists, and I don’t know if they have children."  Very noble, eh?  So you're perfectly willing to give your rapists the freedom to do the same to some other woman.  

This woman is a perfect Democrat:  If she had her way, and prisons were abolished, rapists, murderers and muggers would be able to attack as they wished, with no fear.  Krauthamer makes no exceptions, even for murder or child rape?  Is there any outrage this wacko believes would warrant prison?

Apparently not.  So does Krauthamer believe her "enlightened," "progressive" policy will have any effect on crime?   The journalist who reported this story carefully didn't ask.

Here's an idea: Sociologists should send teams to prisons and ask the prisoners two questions:

1. "If you had known *before doing whatever you did to be sent here* would cause you to be sent to prison, would you still have done it?"

(Men who killed for revenge or attacked a cheating partner or similar are likely to say the possibility of prison wouldn't have deterred 'em.)

2. "After you're released, would you be more likely to consider committing a crime if you knew there was no penalty for doing so?"

The answer to the second question should be clear proof that abolishing prisons will result in an exponential increase in crime.  But of course nothing will deter the insanity of irrational liberal women like Krauthamer--or liberal DAs or judges or politicians.

Source:

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/why-i-didnt-report-my-rape/
 

Virginia Democrats--who now control all the state govt--immediately propose 50 new taxes!

Last fall Virginia voters handed total control of that  state over to Democrats, cuz most voters are Democrats and love big government and high taxes.  Note they keep bleating about prices being too high, but still wanna raise taxes.  Hmmm...

Democrats in the legislature have now introduced DOZENS of bills to impose new taxes on citizens--because Dems are all about...affordability, eh? 

Summary of bills introduced by Virginia Democrats:
  New personal property tax on electric leaf blowers and electric landscaping equipment;
  New tax on "large employers"--paid per employee, every year;
  New tax on guns
  New tax on ammunition
  New tax on people who deliver food or Amazon, UPS or FedEx. (May be a county tax in the shithole of northern Virginia, which is 80% Democrat.)
  Considering a new tax on concerts ("events");
  Adding a special tax on investment income;
  New tax on storage facilities
  New tax on gym memberships
  New tax on dog walkers (people paid to walk dogs);
  New tax on dog grooming
  New tax on "counseling"
  New tax on "digital personal property" (no idea how "digital personal property" is defined.)
  Raising tax on new cars;
  New "fees" (taxes) on "highway use;"
  Raising the hotel tax in Arlington
  New tax on dry cleaning
  New tax on home repair contractors
  New tax on car repair services

Wait...don't Democrat pols constantly scream that all prices are too high for working families?  Always bleating about "affordability" for working families?  And blaming Trump's economy, of course.  But imposing all these new taxes (and raising existing taxes) shows that all the Dems' talk about "affordability" was just bullshit designed to win votes.  Their 50 new taxes show their real agenda.
 

Liberal female judge in NYC dismisses the murder charge against Luigi Mangione

If you want an inkling of how utterly, totally fucked up liberals are, consider the following:  Last year in the Dem-ruled shithole of NYC, Luigi Mangione walked up behind a man and shot him in the back several times, killing him.  The murder was caught on video.

He was charged with murder.  But now a liberal female judge in New York--Margaret M. Garnett, appointed by the senile vegetable bribem--has dismissed the charge of "murder by use of a firearm," which carried a possible death penalty.  

So the killer will not face the possibility of a death sentence--for carrying out a planned assassination, with a gun.

Let's review here:  Was there a murder?  Yes.  Was the murder weapon a gun?  Yes.  And yet the liberal female judge dismissed the ONLY charge that carried a possible death penalty.

Garnett ruled that the murder charge was technically flawed, saying it could be used only "in tandem with a crime of violence.” 

Wait...are you saying that BY LAW, a murderer can't get the death penalty unless he commits ANOTHER violent crime "in tandem"?  What kind of insanity is this? 

The prosecution claimed Mangione’s alleged stalking of his victim met the requirement of "another violent crime in tandem."  Garnett ruled that it didn't.

The female judge admitted (in writing) that her legal analysis might seem "tortured and strange, and the result may seem contrary to our intuitions about the criminal law,” and then proceeded to dismiss the murder charge altogether, saying she was "just trying to faithfully apply Supreme Court rulings to the case.” 

Now, apparently this is--somehow--federal law.

How incredible was her ruling?  Well after the liberal female judge put her RULING on the record, one of Mangione’s attorneys--female--speaking on the courthouse steps to a crowd of the killer's adoring fans, smilingly praised what she called an “incredible decision.” 

Incredible indeed.

Source: NBC, laughing all the way

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/luigi-mangione-will-not-face-death-penalty-judge-nixes-two-federal-cou-rcna256715 

The end of western nations?

If you're an American who pays attention to things other than the absurd crap on television and Hollywood crap, and the breathless avalanche of PR releases of the "elites"--the "bread and circuses" that keep people distracted and occupied--you know what this graph shows without being told.  Take a guess, and you might impress yourself:

 

It's the "total fertility rate" in the U.S.--the average number of children born to all women.  And as you may have guessed, to keep the population level, on average each woman would need to have 2.02 children.  That's called the "replacement rate."

Warning:  Not one politician or "elite" member of the Media wants to talk about what I'm about to explain--because it predicts the inevitable death of...something.  Seriously. 

You note that the last number shown (2020) is less than 2.0.  And the average Democrat thinks "Dat guud, cuz pipo drive cars and heat their homes and hot water, an' fly in jet airplanes!  An' all doze things emit duh dread poison gas CO2, which beez killin' duh climate by Global Warming!  (S'cuse me: "Climate Change")  So havin' fewer kids than the replacement rate is guuuud! cuz it means fewer CO2 emitters killin' duh Erf."

Ooohhh YES, geniuses!  That's SO totally woke!

Just a couple of tiny, tiny concerns:  First, the most recent number (2025) is WAY less than the replacement rate.  Second: the number you see is an AVERAGE, and the people who publish this stuff NEVER break it out by race.  And the truth is that the TFR for whites is WAY less than the average.  In fact it's about 1.4.

Democrat moron: "Dat jus' cuz dey don't have doze numbers!  Hospitals don't record the race of newborns, so how cud anyone know, eh?"

And of course Democrat voters believe that.  But that's horseshit: the data on birth by race is known.  The "elites" who run the Mainstream Media, and the politicians, just don't want YOU to know--because the TFR for whites is WAY below the average, at about 1.4.  The only thing that keeps the overall TFR at about 1.7 today is that most other races are way over 2.0, which pulls the national average up to 1.7. 

Now: if you know just a bit of math, there's an easy equation called "exponential growth" that also works for exponential decay.  (If you don't know it, google it.)  If you plug in the numbers you'll see that in 40 years or so, whites will comprise roughly ten percent of the U.S. population.  So let's look at that society--which is inevitable.

Democrats: "Dat faaaabulous!  See, lotsa' whites like dat AWFUL capitalism, an' 'duh Patriarchy' (male dominance), which is oppression!  So duh sooner we gets rid of whites, duh sooner society will be fair an' equitable, SEE?  It'll be 'from each according to his, her or their ability, TO each according to his, her or their NEED!"  It'll be SOoo faaabulous!" 

(Bonus points if you know who popularized essentially that slogan--updated to reflect tranny demands.) 

Ahh.  Tell us, brilliant Democrats: If you have a system that offers every resident (not just every citizen, but anyone) $3,000 a month for doing nothing, how many will choose that instead of working for a living, eh?

Think hard before you answer.

Soon 90% of the population will be getting stoned all day and playing video games or watching TV, cuz dat SOoo much mo' fun den' workin' fo' duh Man to earn money, eh?

For young Americans: Margaret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister of the UK, and a brilliant opponent of socialism (communism).  She coined a famous phrase: "The only problem with socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other peoples' money."

So to summarize: We started by noting a number "set in concrete" (i.e. has so much inertia due to 340 million people that barring war, it's not likely to change much in the next 20 years) that predicts essentially the end of the white race.  Then we note that Democrats push every other race, and hate capitalism (yes, they actually say that).  And that inevitably leads...where?

The U.S. ceases to be the leading economy, but simply continues to borrow increasing amounts of money to support the "Universal Basic Income" schemes of the Democrats.  Collapse is inevitable.

(If you're not familiar with "Universal Basic Income," look it up.  It's a Democrat policy.  They just go quiet about it when they're not in power.)

Now: I don't have kids, so as the saying goes, I don't have a dog in this hunt.  If the Democrat morons wanna install socialism it won't have any direct impact on me.  I'll drink a toast to the loss of that last beacon of freedom--that "shining city on a hill," as Reagan said--but I'll be fine.

By contrast, if you have children, and understand economics, there's a slight chance you may realize the current future won't be happy for them under socialism.  

If you don't realize that, may your kids realize what you've condemned them to. 

Meanwhile, consider this:  Why is the white birthrate so low?  What's caused white women to have fewer children?  There are several factors, but the common thread is that they're all pushed relentlessly by the anti-American Mainstream Media: "Men are pigs!"  "Women are powerful so dey don' need a husband!"  ("don't need a husband" is true if gummint gives women everything they need, which it now does).  "Whites are oppressors!"  "Other races are cool, whites are clumsy and to be ridiculed."

How many of those things sound familiar from the Mainstream Media?

This is not an accident. 

6.4 million Americans may have been unwittingly enrolled in Obamacare via scammers.

The real outrage wouldn't fit in the title line: Researchers say those who were "unwittingly enrolled" were claimed to have such low incomes that they qualified to have their ENTIRE premium paid by taxpayers.

So by the rules of that ghastly crap-law, the federal gruberment sent billions of dollars of "subsidies" directly to insurance companies that claimed these people were "enrolled" in Obozo-care.

And because those enrolled were never billed, virtually none ever knew they'd been "enrolled" for "free" health-insurance, so most never made any claims on the insurance companies that were supposedly providing coverage.  So the insurance companies pocketed the entire premium without having to pay for any actual health-care.

Here's how it worked:  Scammers ("brokers") offered people "gift cards" in return for their personal information, which the "brokers" used to enroll them in Obozocare plans in which ALL the premiums were paid by "duh gruberment" (actually by working Americans with tax dollars).   

A 2021-2022 expansion of Affordable Care Act subsidies made coverage fully subsidized for individuals claiming incomes in a specific range. Paragon Health Institute investigated and estimated that by 2025, at least 6.4 million more people were enrolled in these zero-premium plans than were actually eligible.

Zero premium means the enrollee did not pay for the plan—it was paid entirely by taxpayers.  And in  2024, 40% of all Americans in fully subsidized plans used no healthcare services at all

Reportedly, unscrupulous brokers and enrollment agents found clients by advertising gift cards and free coverage, collecting personal information from callers, and enrolling them — often without their knowledge or consent.  Other enrollees were totally fictitious.

Many of the enrollees never realized they had coverage because the government paid the full premium directly to insurance companies, which then paid substantial commissions to the scammers.  

85% of all insurance company revenue now comes from premiums paid by government, meaning by taxpayers, so the companies have no incentives to offer products that are low-priced.  And no government employee questions the prices.

"Their primary client now is the United States Treasury, and they're so dependent on the federal government for their revenue source, that's why insurance companies are spending hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying Congress to continue this gravy train of these enhanced Obamacare subsidies."

One remedy for Medicaid fraud, as well as other programs, is to shut off the federal money.  As long as states can get billions from Washington, they don't have any incentive to fight fraud.

In New York there has been an unprecedented spike in Medicaid-funded home health aides, who are often family members taking care of relatives, which creates fertile ground for fraud.  In California, fraud has found a home within the hospice care industry. 

https://justthenews.com/accountability/waste-fraud-and-abuse/waste-fraud-minnesota-being-paid-taxpayers-outside-state 

Politicians order that dog owners not walk their dogs in the forest, because...whut?

Politicians are among the dumbest sons of bitches on the planet.  Here's example #5,408,485:

In the Netherlands last week, politicians in the province of North Brabant ORDERED that residents would no longer be allowed to walk with their dogs in the local forest. 

The hoot is the *stated reason* given by the moronic pols:  They claim "dogs increase Global Warming.  Seriously.

https://brusselssignal.eu/2026/01/dutch-dog-owners-shock-at-forest-ban-while-wolves-roam-free/ 

Wait, do they drive cars?  Heat their doghouses?  Fly across the ocean to attend award ceremonies for themselves?

Nope, the pols claim the reason for the ban is...wait for it..."nitrogen emissions" from dogs.

And at this point rational people who paid at least a bit of attention in highschool recall that 80% of the atmosphere is relatively inert nitrogen, so how can nitrogen be a problem--let alone how the pols think dogs can have any effect on nitrogen in any case, eh?

Turns out nitrogen per se isn't the problem, but a molecule of nitrogen and oxygen called nitrous oxide (N2O), which the warmies scream is an even worse greenhouse gas than the dread poison CO2.

Dog owners: "So how are dogs emitting N2O?"

Greenie/wokie politician: "All animal waste contains nitrogen compounds, and many of those decompose into N2O.  So there ya go, deplorable: tons of dog waste are killing duh Erf."

Dog owner thinks a minute: "Don't all animals produce the same type of waste, including humans?  If so, why are you blaming just dogs?"

Politician: "Uh...well...uh...we're not.  We've passed a law ordering all dairy farmers to cull half their milk cows to reduce nitrous oxide emissions.  So SEE, deplorables, we're being equally dictatorial to everyone!"

Wheat farmer:
>>"Wait...by 'cull' you really mean 'kill,' right?  So you're gonna force dairy farms to kill half their cows.  You know that's gonna make the price of milk and cheese explode, which is gonna piss off a LOT of voters.  Wow.
  >> Fortunately we farmers don't raise cows, just nutritious, non-polluting food crops.  So it's good that your new RULES aren't gonna put US out of business!
  >>See, fortunately we only use *nitrates*--NO3, not that climate-killing N2O.  We've used nitrates for decades as fertilizer, to increase crop yields, so everyone known it's safe.  So it's a relief to know you reeally smaht politicians aren't blaming US!  Are you?"

Wokie politician: "Uh...well...uh...actually nitrates break down into N2O too, so our new law DECREES that farmers must cut your use of nitrate fertilizer in half too."

Farmer: "Wait...do you morons realize that will cut crop yields almost 40%?"

Pol: "We don't believe that'll happen, and we've hired a VERY pricey PhD professor as a consultant, and he assures us that crop yields will only drop 30% at most."

Farmer: "Ahh.  And how long did this professor farm for a living before becoming a PhD?"

Pol: "Oh he's never actually been a farmer.  He just knows all about farming because he's got a PhD in Agricultural Management!  You wouldn't argue with someone who has a PhD, would ya?"

Dog owner: "So you've banned dogs from the forest.  But they're gonna produce the same waste regardless of where they poop, so how is your law gonna stop their waste from turning into this gas you claim is gonna kill the planet, just producing the gas somewhere else?"

Pol: "Uh...it doesn't.  So we're working on a law that will make dog owners pay the government for the damage their dogs do to Erf's climate.  Along the lines of the U.K's TV license, $250 a year or so."

Farmer: "So what will you do about *human waste*?  You gonna charge people an extra $250 a year in poop tax?"

Pol: "Actually since people make far more waste than small dogs, the tax we have in mind will be closer to $2,000 per year.  So we expect most couples will have fewer children."

Farmer: "What about 'immigrants' who are already living on welfare paid by taxpayers?  How will they be able to pay your new waste tax?"

Pol: "Of course *they* won't have to pay.  Or I suppose we could give 'em another $2,000 a year per family member and then have 'em pay it back.  Of course we'd have to hire another 5,000 government employees to administer that, but it's a good idea.
   "Also, our scientists are working on a chemical toilet that will turn N2O into harmless nitrogen gas.  It looks like in mass production we can get the price down to around $23,000.  But we'd give people three years to replace their existing toilets with the new type, because we care about the little people." 

Farmer: "Are ALL you politicians this crazy?"

Pol: "That's HATE SPEECH, deplorable!  I hereby sentence you to three years in prison!"

[Sound of gunshot.  Large hole appears in Politician's head.  Everyone in the hearing room looks at each other in astonishment.]

Dog owner: "I saw nothing."

Farmer: "Same here."

Audience members: "Absolutely."
===

SOooo...I gather most of you think this is fantasy.  Satire.  Impossible.  Well you morons need to get your heads out of your video games or your TVs or phones and open your damn eyes.

The new boogeyman by duh exspurts at dat faaabulous U.N. iz now "nitrogen pollution."  Here are the communist pencil-dick tyrants at the U.N. on the threat to damn near everything posed by "nitrogen pollution:"
     >>We need to take action NOW to #BeatNitrogenPollution, to *mitigate climate change!*  It's an issue we can't afford to ignore a moment longer!  If we don't limit nitrogen pollution right away, we'll face a *cascade of negative impacts* that will *threaten the environment, the economy, our well-being and livelihoods--from degraded ecosystems to polluted soil, water and air, and species loss."*>>

<<Any of those plaintive bleats sound familiar?  Sure, that's the same horseshit they were spouting about Global Warming--which, as you may have noticed, has now been replaced by "climate change"--since it has slowly become apparent that the planet is NOT overheating the way the control freaks screamed it would.  But their grift has become SO profitable that instead of saying "Ah, guess we were wrong on that one!" they just changed the name but kept the same controls in place.
   So now whatever the weather does (yeah, I know: weather isn't climate), the control freaks can claim "SEE? We WARNED YEW!"

More UN crap:
>>Nitrogen pollution contributes to the *triple planetary crisis* of climate change, nature and biodiversity loss, and pollution and waste.>>

EVERY time "nitrogen" is mentioned, the next word is "pollution."  Sorry, your fearmongering long ago lost its power over rational adults, assholes.
  
Here's what the U.N. screams under the heading "Biodiversity and ecosystems:"

Together with habitat destruction and climate change, nitrogen pollution is one of the biggest drivers of biodiversity loss on the planet today.

Ahhh, "biodiversity loss," y'say?  Oh, I see there's a button you can click if ya wanna "read more," eh?  Let's see the explanation!  And here's the entire explanation:

According to a recent study, ecosystems such forests, heaths and surface waters are more sensitive to atmospheric nitrogen pollution than previously thought.

Wait, that's not even remotely an explanation.  It's a "naked assertion."  Big damn difference.  But they go on (of course):

"Earth system scientists say that the world’s planetary boundaries for interference with the nitrogen cycle have already been surpassed, meaning that there is a high risk of irreversible changes to ecosystems and biodiversity."

"Interference with the nitrogen cycle," y'say? Wow.  One could as easily say humans are "interfering with the energy cycle" by generating electricity, or heating your dwelling, eh?  

It's just a small step from here to demanding that humans live in caves and eat grubs, because anything else is decreed to be "interfering."  It's brazen fear-mongering.

So, experts, do tell us:  What fraction of global heat trapping is done by nitrous oxide compared to, say, water vapor, eh?

And if we use your model, how much do you claim the average temp will rise by 2050 at current concentrations of nitrous oxide, eh?  Now how much temperature rise if we assume that concentration were to *double?*  Publish the computer program of your model so people who know how to take those apart can see where you're making assumptions to support your conclusions (a.k.a. bullshitting).  

https://unece.org/media/environment/Air-Pollution-Convention/press/372350 

It's getting crazier

Gettin' weirder:  Gold has risen 28% in the last 26 days.  

Seriously.  On Jan 2nd it closed at $4330 per ounce, and today (1/28) it closed at $5560.

Yes, some of the manic rise is due to people just following the herd, and when the folks who invested early sell, the price will dip.  But even considering trend followers, this is almost unprecedented.

Any ideas on the underlying cause?  Sure.  

Democrats want civil war--see Dem official below

If you're a Democrat, your party wants to prevent the federal government from deporting people who are in the U.S. illegally--including murderers, rapists, child traffickers and cartel members.  Your party's top leaders ignore that these people broke the law to enter the U.S, and instead rationalize: "Deez pipo reeeally nice, so we not gon' let yew deport 'em!  In fact we will attack federal agents who try!"

But that's not a fraction of what the Dem/communist strategists wanna do.  Listen to a high-ranking Democrat official in Philly: 

 

For those who don't know, this charmless viper is Larry Krasner, and he's the damn District Attorney of Philly.  Won that post thanks to a million dollars from George Soros. 

Insiders say halftime show at the Superbowl will be "as queer as possible." Chosen by Roger Goodell

The Liberal Democrats who actually run all so-called "entertainment" in the U.S.--including sports--never miss a chance to stick a thumb in the eye of regular Americans.  They sneer at you and your values, do everything possible to corrupt your kids--and get you to pay for it.  Wow.

Latest example: the halftime show the NFL commissioner has chosen for the Superbowl.

The commissioner of the NFL approved a queer rapper from Puerto Rico who goes by "Bad Bunny."  Insiders say the Puerto Rican rapper--a "male"-- will wear a dress and celebrate LGBTQ “icons” from the stage.  The insider said the queer rapper plans to make the halftime show “as queer as possible.”  Because what's more quintessentially American than gays, queers and trannies, eh?   Especially as halftime "entertainment" for the most widely advertised and viewed sports event in the U.S.

What kind of conclusion do ya think foreign viewers will draw about the U.S. from this show, eh?  That our society is utterly depraved.  Almost sounds like it's part of a plan, eh?

And here's the topper: the faaabulously rich, seemingly anti-American commissioner of the NFL (Roger Goodell) has defended his decision to make this halftime show all about queers and trannies, claiming the LGBTQ-themed show will “unite people."

“Unite,” y'say.  Somehow I don't think your show will do what you think it will--unless you're using "unite" in the liberal baffle-gab sense, meaning "You will all wildly support whatever we do, because we rule you."  

And of course because millions of Americans watch the Superbowl, the LGBTQ mafia will crow "SEE, deplorables?  Americans LOVED ouah faaaabulous show!"  And the Lying Mainstream Media will totally ignore the millions of Americans who didn't watch just the halftime show. 

New York City announces massive new "free" grift program: "free" child-care for all

The looting spree that will destroy New York City is already underway.  Watch as that doomed city's new Muslim communist mayor Zohran Mamdani DECREES that taxpayers will now be forced to provide"free" childcare to anyone from anywhere who shows up in New York City—including the illegal aliens Mamdani bleats he will protect from deportation.

 

And if you didn't think it could get any worse, consider this: As in Minnesomalia, alleged "child-care providers" will simply bill the city directly for the maximum daily rate per child charged by the most posh 5th Avenue luxury outfits--cuz we iz all equal, comrade!--and will bill for the maximum number of children for which their space is certified.

No one from the city will ever verify that the "child-care centers" actually have children five days a week, or have any toys or kiddie furniture.  Momdani's regime will pay.  And within days the number of alleged "child-care centers" will have tripled.

Liberals will shrug: "When we made it 'free,' mothers who'd asked their parents to babysit now used the fabulous new "commercial" businesses.  So SEE, deplorable?"  But in reality it'll be Minniesomalia all over again, just with four times as many fraudsters cuz so many more illegals.

And as in Minniesomalia, the Momdani regime will angrily deny that there's any fraud, and will fire any city auditor or whistleblower who says there is--because the fraudsters will make big campaign contributions to Momdani, and to Dems on the city council.

When fraudsters learn about new, risk-free ways to steal money from taxpayers, they do it as quickly as possible, to get in on the loot as early as possible --just as with every government program.

   

Man climbs 1,670-foot building...without ropes. Oddly, some demons are screaming

You're looking at the top 20 stories of the 11th tallest building in the world: 1,670 feet tall.  And the world's most talented climber just climbed it...without ropes.  Completely free.  Click here to see the video, which will curl your toes. 

 

The climber was an American, and if you read the comments you'll see DOZENS of shitheads wailing and screaming that this was NOT a feat of any great skill or courage.

Wow.  But if the climber had been from any other country, you know all the shitheads would have been gushing with praise--and well deserved.  But since he's an American, the shits have to denigrate the feat.  Oh well... 

UK government lackeys create an on-line "game" to convince young Brits opposing unlimited immigration is raaacist

The UK is dead.  Many Brits know it, others are too "woke" to realize it.

As you could guess, only one of those two groups will turn out to be right.

The UK has been conquered by Islamic immigrants, welcomed in by several UK governments.  All the immigrants vote Labour, which resulted in the election of Keir Starmer, who's one of the goofiest sons of bitches on the planet.  

For example: the UK has a post called "Home Secretary" which is like DHS with some functions of our State Department.  The agency the Home Secretary heads is called the Home Office.

"Home Office" sounds warm and comforting, eh?

Starmer appointed a Muslim female to head that crucial agency.

SO...since the Starmer regime is determined to keep importing a million Muslims a year to the UK, it wanted to find a way to get native Brits to stop objecting to that.  (In the U.S. bribem tried to do that by screaming that anyone who objected to illegal immigration was a "white supremacists" and thus the greatest threat EVER to our nation.  How'd that work, Joe?)

But the UK Labour party (Starmer's party) was far more clever, so a year ago the UK government gave a million bucks to a leftist media group ("Shout Out UK") to create an on-line "game"--oh wait, sorry: the creators called it a "visual novel and learning experience" to make it seem less like propaganda--designed to convince young Brits that the government importing millions of anti-white foreigners was absolutely faaabulous, and the key to prosperity and a safe future!

In other words, the so-called "visual novel and learning experience" was and is pure propaganda.

The "game" is called Pathways, and to make their point the government-funded leftist propagandists created a character named Amelia to represent people who were anti-immigrant.  Amelia was portrayed as dumb--for objecting to her country being taken over by immigrants.  The game's creators ensured citizen would know Amelia was dumb because...wait for it...she had purple hair and dressed provocatively, eh?  "SEE, citizen? Dumb!"

Then an unexpected thing happened: Young Brits--who correctly realized that the so-called "visual novel and learning experience" was brazen leftist propaganda--began supporting Amelia, and posting their own AI artwork of Amelia bravely defending the UK.

One can hardly imagine the surprise of the propagandists:  They had a shit-ton of tax dollars and the backing of the fucking socialist government--and then a few thousand young Brits with AI skills turned the villain of Starmer's high-dollar propaganda tool into a meme.

As word of the growing internet rebellion spread, another funny thing happened: the government website that hosted the so-called "visual novel and learning experience" stopped loading segments featuring Amelia.  No explanation, just that endless rotating circle saying "loading."  

Leftist: "Dat jus' cuz so many users wanted to have the 'learning experience,' yew dumb deplorables!  Suggesting that we smaaht propagandists wud change a line of code to prevent dis faaabulous 'visual novel and learning experience' from loading Amelia segments iz  crazy."

Ohh you bet, sparky.  So is there a lesson here?

We asked advisors to Democrat governors JB Pritzker, Abigail Spanberger (VA), Mikie Sherill (NJ), Gavin Newscum, lesbian Tina Kotek (Oregon), Bob Ferguson (WA), the ghastly Janet Mills (Maine) and senators Chris Murphy, Dick Durbin, Liz Warren, and congresswhores Hakeem Jeffries, AOC, Ilhan Omar, Ayana Pressley, Jasmine Crockett et al.  And they all said some variation of this:

"There is nothing at all to be learned from the internet's response to this "visual novel." Absolutely nothing!  In fact we Democrats need to do the same thing the faaabulous Starmer government did, cuz if we do that, all the cool young pipo will vote for us for the rest of their lives!"
   "See, young people believe anything they see on the Internet.  So if we can just pass a LAW to pay our creative leftist friends, oh, $10 million or so of taxpayer money (i.e. free), we'll have all those kids voting Democrat for their entire lives! 

Ahh, just like Lyndon Johnson said about blacks: 'I'll gibs 'em free stuff an' dey'll vote Dem for the next hundred years!'  Some great ideas are timeless, eh?"

I predict that 30 years from now, historians will find that Keir Starmer was a communist plant.

Many spirited comments here.

Two mismanaged nations, two energy stories

Estimates are that Cuba requires about 100,000 barrels of oil per day (b/d) to maintain their economy and produce electricity.  

The island produces an estimated 40,000 B/d onshore.  Last year Mexico sold Cuba about 19,000 B/d, and the communist Maduro regime in Venezuela provided about 37,000 B/d.  Analysts say Cuba didn't pay cash for much of the Vz oil, but instead sent doctors and security personnel to Vz in exchange for some of that oil. 

Mexico says it will keep selling the same amounts as last year.  Question is, will Trump allow Venezuela to keep selling oil to Cuba under the current part-cash, part-services arrangement.

Of course any exporting nation would be happy to sell oil to Cuba at the market price, but Cuba is unlikely to have the foreign exchange to pay world prices.

Without its oil-for-services deal with Vz, Cuba will likely have to buy 10,000 to 20,000 b/d on the world market.

The larger figure would cost Cuba's communnist government an extra $30 million a month.  Hmmm... 

====
Another energy story:
   Thanks to the communist former chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, that nation was an early, aggressive pusher of Global Warming [now climate change] and started replacing all their allegedly climate-killing coal-fired powerplants with solar and wind power.

Germany had lots of nuclear powerplants, and not one had ever had an accident.  But around this same time Angela's merry band of communists started wailing that those nuclear powerplants were dangerous, and that now that solar panels and windmills had been shown to be SO faaabulously successful and reliable, the country could now shut down all its scary, dangerous nuclear generating plants.  

So since Angela's party also controlled the legislature, her party passed a LAW ordering all the nukes shut down and dismantled.

Yay!  We have now solved all the problems, citizen!

Only then did they begin to realize solar didn't work at night (sarc) or when it was cloudy (and there are LOTS of clouds in Europe).  And sometimes--big discovery!--the wind didn't blow as fast as the pols said it should.  So Angela's party huddled and quietly mulled: Whatever shall we do?  We can never admit we fucked up, cuz we'll lose office!"

So...they started re-opening...the coal-fired plants they'd closed to fight Gobal Warming.

As you already predicted, the Greens were horrified!  "We thought you agreed that Global Warming was the greatest threat to life on Erf!" they screamed.  So the pols huddled again, and said "If we keep the coal-fired plants running, the Greens say they'll vote against us and we'll lose control of the country!  Ohh NOOOooo!!"

But without the coal plants, we won't have enough electricity, so we'll have to double prices AGAIN, and the voters will be mad!  And we'll lose control!"

Looks like our only option is to...wait for it...re-start the nuclear plants we just ordered torn down."

Problem is, of the 17 flawless, perfect nukes Angela and her band of communists ORDERED shut down, 11 have been dismantled to such an extent that re-starting them isn't economically feasible.  There's a chance 6 of the 17 could be re-started, but a) the Greens will scream as loudly about 6 as about 17; and b) just six won't be enough to fulfill demand.

Ironic, eh?  Germany built clean, safe nuclear plants, and Angela and her lackeys built costly, intermittent wind and solar solely to enable 'em to shut down the coal-fired plants they were sure were gonna kill duh Erf.  Then after they shut down the nukes they found wind and solar weren't putting out as much as the "experts" said they would--which has forced Germany to try to re-start both the coal-fired and nuclear plants. 

Except 11 of the 17 nukes that were running--perfectly--have been dismantled so completely that they essentially can't be re-started.

If someone wanted to destroy Germany and impoverish the people, this is how they'd do it, so no one could hold them responsible. 

The Media and academics keep calling hydrocarbons "fossil fuels." Why?

If you pay attention you may have heard the Lying Leftist Mainstream Media and all Democrat pols call oil, gas and coal "fossil fuels."  Now why do ya suppose they call 'em that, eh?

Try asking 'em.  Most don't know, but a few know that the reason is that the "experts" have always thought oil, gas and coal came from dead dinosaurs (hence "fossils").

People who actually knew something about oil and gas fine-tuned that by saying "Well ANY organic matter, like one-celled ocean organisms or plant matter, can turn into oil if given a few million years under the right conditions of heat and pressure."

But it turns out virtually none of the oil and gas on the planet came from either dinosaurs or one-celled ocean critters or plants, but from methane--CH4--what you know as "natural gas."  It's the simplest "hydrocarbon"--carbon plus hydrogen.

See, if you hook 8 molecules of CH4 together, you get high-octane gasoline.  Connect a few more and you get a huge array of combustible hydrocarbons.  And it turns out that if you force CH4 through rocks with extremely small pores, under lots of pressure, the CH4s link up automatically.

An early relative of this process was discovered and patented way back in 1925 and improved over the next 15 years.  It was called the "Fischer-Tropsch process," and in WW2 Germany began making tons of high-octane aviation gasoline, oil and diesel fuel this way.  By the end of the war Germany was making over 124,000 barrels of synthetic fuel a DAY, providing over 90% of their aviation gasoline and half of their total oil. 

Again, they were NOT refining oil, but instead were making oil and gasoline from carbon and hydrogen atoms--the same atoms that make natural gas. 

This process has been made even more efficient by forcing methane thru rocks having extremely small pores.  The process can be tweaked even more by using an iron catalyst.

The Earth has plenty of high-pressure methane, plenty of small-pore rock formations and lots of iron.  So tens of thousands of locations produce oil of varying "weights."  And in many more locations we find unequivocal evidence that oil was present at some point, but over time it escaped to the surface.

If you're skeptical, consider this: On Earth methane is a gas, but at extremely low temps it's a liquid.  And 20 years ago on one of the moons of Saturn, a U.S. satellite found unequivocal evidence of oceans--not of water but of liquid methane.  

Now it's certainly true that plant and animal matter decomposes into methane.  But how would life evolve on a frozen moon of Saturn to make enough plant or "dinosaur" matter to make oceans of methane?  If, as the Media and your teachers have always taught, all hydrocarbons come from dinosaurs or ocean critters or plants, how did any of those things live on Titan? 

We're all ears, academics.
 

Leftist demon "delivery nurse" posts video wishing ghastly injury and pain on pregnant conservative woman

Last month the White House announced that press secretary Karoline Leavitt was pregnant.  Normally such an announcement prompts congratulations and warm wishes.

But not from leftist demons from hell.  They hate conservatives, so the demons wish misery and pain on the expectant mother.

Of course you think that's just hyperbole.  Wake the hell up: A hospital in Boca Raton had a "labor and delivery nurse" named Lexie Lawler, who posted a video of herself on TikTok wishing that Leavitt would suffer a "4th-degree tear" during delivery and suffer great pain. 

You probably don't believe anyone could be this hateful, so click the link below to watch the demon herself, sneeringly wishing pain on the expectant mother:

“As a labor and delivery nurse it gives me great joy to wish Karoline Leavitt a fourth-degree tear.  I hope you f—-ing rip from bow to stern and never s— normally again, you c—.” 

So do ya think the demon apologized?  Not even close: Here's its response to being called out:

 

Ah, so WE'RE the bad ones for calling out your ghastly behavior, eh?  Typical demon. 

Are you beginning to grasp the reality yet?  Leftist/Dem demons count on the fact that most Americans simply CAN'T believe anyone can harbor so much hate.  Even when they see Lawler making that statement on the video she/it posted, good people STILL don't believe it.  "Dis mus' be FAKE!  AI!"

Except it's real.  They really are that evil.  And you ignore them at your peril. 

The hospital had the good sense to fire her, but there are tens of thousands others just like her in other positions to inflict pain and damage on conservatives. 

CNN has a weather warning: We're all gonna DIE! And you know who to blame?

 CNN, Jan 20, 2026-- A terrible winter storm is set to lash the eastern half of the United States with damaging ice and heavy snow this week, fed by a brutal blast of Arctic air that will hit minorities hardest.

The Weather Prediction Service said the storm "would produce brutal swaths of heavy snow, sleet and treacherous freezing rain all over the east half of the U.S.  The horrible snow, sleet and freezing rain could stretch more than 1,000 miles from Oklahoma and northern Texas to North Carolina and Virginia.

A spokespyrsyn for the union representing employees of the National Weather Service said "We've been trying to warn the public for a week now but we're still understaffed after the cruel government shutdown caused by the awful Rethuglicans.  The only pyrsyn who had the password to unlock the official computer used to alert the nation still hasn't come back from the shutdown, so we were forced to make do with last-century methods, like telephones."

"We tried to warn Orange Hitler but he was too busy trying to invade Greenland and didn't take our frantic calls.  So if any American dies from this terrible storm, you know who to blame!"

"One thing certain: Brutal cold is on the way for millions.  We tried to warn the nation about this deadly cold, but everyone thought we were kidding--mumbled something about 'Global Worming.'  We don't understand why they don't believe us!  

Demons should be returned to their boss.

Democrats: "Enlightened humans know men are awful, so no enlightened pyrsyn would want to be one.  So we must protect the right of pyrsyns "assigned male at birth" to be female at any time.     
     "Notice we carefully did NOT say 'to become female,' cuz obviously these pyrsyns have really been female all along, right?  Right??!!"

In plumbing there are male and female fittings.  The first type goes into the second, never vice-versa.  Same with electrical connectors.  But allowing the continued use of these terms would conflict with the Democrats' demands, eh?  SO, to predict the newest demand from Democrats: "We want a law making the use of those terms a 'hatecrime' (note the trendy new term, all one word, like Orwell's "thoughtcrime"), because they "perpetuate gender stereotypes."

Oh, I hear my Democrat friends laughing, saying "Dat couldn't possibly happen!"  

Really?  In 2010 did you think it was possible that by 2020 states would be using tax dollars to pay doctors to perform sex-change operations on minors without parental consent?

Yeah, didn't think so. 

Trade deficit is...uhh...tell us, Oh Mainstream Media! An' what does it MEAN? [crickets]

If you're a typical American adult, you probably don't know much about the "trade deficit."  Not how much per month or year, not what it's been in the past 20 years, not whether high or low is good or bad.

And of course the Mainstream Media is delighted to continue either lying to ya or just saying nothing about it.  When Obozo or the Vegetable were in office, the Media didn't worry about the trade deficit.  Economists knew it was hurting our economy because we were throwing, oh, $100 billion a MONTH to other nations instead of keeping it here in our economy, but the Media didn't say even a mildly critical word, cuz when Democrats have the presidency the Mainstream Media doesn't allow any bad news, eh?

Now that Trump is prez, the monthly trade deficit has fallen to about one-third of what it was when he took office.  Economists consider that good news, but you'd never know it by reading the NY Times or any other Lying Mainstream Media rag.  Instead they claim what a dramatically lower trade deficit REALLY means is...wait for it..."Americans can't afford to buy imported goods, like cars or computers or TVs!!"  

And why can't they afford those things now?  Why, Trump's eeeebil tariffs, of course!

Three hours ago the NYT posted this article:

U.S. trade deficit fell to lowest level since 2009

Immediately--as if responding to a talking point--357 commenters on Fakebook alone popped up to claim "Dis beez BAD NEWS!"  Or merely not good news.  Anything to make voters recoil from anything Trump does--like deporting murderers and arresting the corrupt head of the drug-centered nation of Venezuela, eh?

SO one commenter wailed,
    "Gee, sounds like our population cannot afford to purchase imported goods, electronics, household appliances, vehicles, clothing, furniture, lumber, steel, shoes etc."

Another: "An indicator that Americans have less money."

Another: "So commerce has contracted."  Really, ya lyin' bastard?  GDP is WAY up--something close to 4 percent, a figure never remotely approached under either bribem or Obozo.

 Another: "Trade deficit is not an economic indicator of anything and never has been."  

Really?

Another: "So Americans just stopped buying more expensive items.  I'm sure it has nothing to do with the overall downtown of the economy."
    Again, GDP way up, but these lying sons of whores say economy is down.  And of course no Mainstream Media rat-bastard tries to set the record straight.

Finally: "But at what cost to integrity & respect?"

Ohhh, absolutely!  "We haz lost ouah integrity and respek!  By importing less!  It's an offense to guud pipo everywhere!"

I could go on for another 300 comments but you get the idea.  But keep in mind all duh comments in duh Times are from Democrats, who mus' be smaaaht cuz dey read duh Times, eh?  

This is how socialist Muslims like Momdani get elected by NYC voters. 
 

Democrats and DEI types destroy everything they touch

Ahh, I see you don't believe that.  I get it.  Well, read on:

California’s main state retirement fund is called "CalPERS," and it just hired a new exec to head its office of "diversity, equity, and inclusion."

The "official" duties of that wallah include "integrating DEI principles into investment practices, and recruiting staff for DEI-informed proxy voting and ESG investing…"

Got it?

And like all DEI bureaucrats, with such grueling duties she'll be VERY well paid: $221,580.  (And of course you already guessed it would be a female.)

The job was given to Shari Slate.  Not surprisingly, neither the CalPERS news release nor Slate's Linkedin profile say she has any experience in the finance industry.  This is no surprise, since the this position doesn't require expertise in finance or evaluating a company's prospects for profitability, but simply deciding whether a company the finance experts suggest investing in checks all the DEI boxes.

Where moonbats rule, the issue is never the issue; the issue is always moonbattery.

CalPERS’ job posting for the position says responsibilities include “collaborating with investment groups to integrate DEI into financial decision-making, advocating for equity-driven investment strategies, and ensuring that CalPERS’ investment portfolio reflects its commitment to sustainability, social responsibility, and equitable outcomes.”

Wow.

So the objective is to use retirement funds as a weapon to force companies to adopt DEI policies.

And following DEI principles CalPERS has invested almost half a BILLION dollars in a category they call "clean energy and technology."  Cuz dat soun' reeel socially responsible," eh?  So how's that been working out, eh?

Last year sleuths found CalPERS had lost 71% of the $468 million it put into that fund.

"Eh, deez jus' nummers, citizen.  Dey don' mean nuffin'!  In fack, all maff beez raaaacis!"

But that's just the tip of the iceberg.  The real figure is a LOT worse:  See, there are people called "actuaries" who predict how long people will live.  Then others take your number of employees, their promised pension amounts and lifespan, and tell you how much the state's retirement system needs to invest to have enough money to cover the calculated cost of all public pensions you've promised.

Last month the Reason Foundation found that CalPERS is a bit short: $166 BILLION.

Unless you're in the biz, you have no idea what this means.

See, no politician will cut the pensions of retired state employees.  So they can either raise taxes, or borrow more money.  It's almost always the second option.  The bonds pile up, burdening the future, but almost no one pushes back because the kids of the future haven't been born yet so obviously can't object, eh?  And voters now alive don't think about the future burden, cuz it's no problem to THEM, eh?

Happens every time, going back millenia.  And it works...every time.  Until it doesn't.

Democrats:  "Whut??  Dat crazy!  It's always worked!  So it always will.  Has to.  Simple logic, deplorable!"

So as the state gets further buried by the cost of servicing its massive debt, the state will have to pay higher interest on its bonds.  Debt service costs will rise even more.

Can anyone predict how that ends?

Source.

https://moonbattery.com/dei-applied-to-retirement-fund-in-california/#disqus_thread