Tag: economics

Spengler and the Clowns in the Bunker

David Goldman, the Asia Times columnist formerly known as Spengler, was invited to an elite conclave of Clown Worlders to discuss the current state of their war with Russia. And if he is to be believed, there is no Plan B for Clown World:

Somewhere last weekend a few dozen former Cabinet members, senior military officers, academics and think tank analysts met to evaluate the world military situation. I can say that I haven’t been so scared since the fall of 1983, when I was a junior contract researcher doing odd jobs for then Special Assistant to the President Norman A Bailey at the National Security Council…

Russia’s economic resilience in the face of supposedly devastating sanctions is only one reflection of a great transformation of world trade. China’s exports to the Global South doubled during the past three years and China now exports more to the South than to developed markets. China’s unprecedented exporting success, in turn, stems from the rapid automation of Chinese industry, which now installs more industrial robots per year than the rest of the world combined.

This is evident, I added, in China’s newfound dominance in the world automotive market but it also has critical military implications. China claims that it has automated plants that can make 1,000 cruise missiles a day—not impossible given that it can manufacture 1,000 EVs a day, or thousands of 5G base stations.

The implication is that China can produce the equivalent of America’s inventory of 4,000 cruise missiles in a week while American defense contractors take years to assemble them by hand.

No one disputed the data I presented. And no one believed that Russia is taking 25,000 casualties a month. Facts weren’t the issue: The assembled dignitaries, a representative sampling of the foreign policy establishment’s intellectual and executive leadership, simply couldn’t imagine a world in which America no longer gave the orders.

They are accustomed to running things and they will gamble the world away to keep their position.

Success always plants the seeds of failure. The current set of Clown Worlders are the third generation in the West, and like every third-generation heir, they are well along the generational pattern of build-crusie-lose that so often produces the rags-to-riches-to-rags-again story so witnessed in once-successful families over time. The current elite no longer understands the differences between the situation they face and the historical challenges surmounted by their predecessors, and they are trying to use the same tactics and techniques that worked for their predecessors in a different time and on a very different set of people.

What we’re witnessing on a grand scale across the West is no different than watching the founder’s grandson resolutely steering the family company onto the rocks even as his siblings, wives, and children blithely spend away the family’s resources in imitation of the second-generation’s unproductive champagne lifestyles. Not only do they have no idea how to go about succeeding, but they can’t imagine failure, not even when it is simultaneously staring them in the face and biting them in the behind.

No wonder Spengler is terrified. The comeuppance for the corrupt clowns who destroyed the wealthiest and most successful societies in human history is almost certainly going to be one for the history books.

UPDATE: The Europeans are finally beginning to figure out that the clowns have abandoned them and they are on their own. But they obviously aren’t smart enough to accept defeat, give up their pretensions, and negotiate a settlement with Russia while they can still get very reasonable terms.

Washington has sent a clear message to European NATO members that they can no longer rely on its military protection, the head of German defense giant Rheinmetall has claimed. For decades, the EU has taken it for granted that the US would come to its rescue in case of war, but “that will no longer happen,” CEO Armin Papperger told The Financial Times. He cited the failure of the US Congress to approve continued military assistance to Ukraine as a signal to Europe that the Americans are not willing to pay for its security.

DISCUSS ON SG

They Know They Will Lose

Although many of their pet politicians, corporate executives, and talking heads in the media don’t realize it yet, the top globalists already know that they have already lost WWIII, as Col Douglas Macgregor points out:

This war has become financial as well as military. And the globalists understand that they’re going to lose this war. And what will come of this is that the BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, are going to be increased by 81 additional members. And all of these people are going to go to a currency that is backed by gold.

And once they go to that currency backed by gold, whether it is one currency or a basket of currencies, it doesn’t make any difference. Yes, we are in a lot of trouble. The globalists know that, and it is why they are so desperate right now. And the greatest fear that I have is that when the Russians do attack and it becomes abundantly clear that Ukraine is finished, I mean, it’s already obvious to anybody who visits the place for any length of time. It’s in ruins.

But once that occurs, I fear that there will be pressure to commit US forces in Poland and Romania, along with Polish forces and potentially Romanian ones, to western Ukraine. And if that occurs, the gloves will come off, because truthfully, thus far, Putin has exercised tremendous restraint, tremendous patience. He does not want a war with the West. If he wanted that, we’d already have it. But if we intervene in western Ukraine, it’s over. We’ll be in a full-fledged war.

You know, I think we grossly miscalculated. Putin had made several speeches over the last 20 years, repeatedly saying, please do not advance the border to Russia. Do not try to transform Ukraine into a hostile actor, an actor with hostile intentions towards Russia. What happens in Ukraine is of existential strategic interest to us, just as theoretically, what happens in Mexico is of existential strategic interest to us. Although this administration has decided to ignore it. He expected that we would negotiate, that he would demonstrate that this was serious, and that Russia wanted its population in eastern Ukraine, which is really Russian, to have equal rights before the law. He wanted to end the oppression of the Russians that lived there, and he wasn’t going to surrender Crimea.

The reason he went into Crimea is he was afraid it was going to be turned into a US naval base. Biden said. “Our goal is regime change. Our goal is to get rid of Putin, and our goal is ultimately to divide Russia into constituent parts, then exploit it.” All of his supporters, his staffers, everyone in the globalist camp knows this is the truth. The so-called oligarchs Kolomoisky, Soros and others were all part of this. None of this is news.

Finally, he said, enough’s enough. He stopped. They set up a strategic defense. They ran an economy-of-force mission, and now they have a force in place that can go as far as it needs to go, which includes to the Polish border. They have a plan for 31-month war against us if we insist on fighting it and we are in no shape to fight a war.

We can’t even recruit for the United States Army or the Marines. The Marines are running around trying to recruit illegals and are being encouraged to do so by the administration. Is that what you want in the ground force, to fight for this country? Forget it. It’s not going to work.

The difference between the coming war that concerns Col Macgregor and the special military operation of the last two years is that Russia has been keeping most of its primary military forces in reserve from the start. The reason we haven’t been seeing any of the vast and sweeping combined-arms offensives that were utilized in Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and Manchuria in the 20th century is because the air force, the navy, and 600,000 army regulars have been preparing for a successful war against NATO that would probably end with the Russian occupation of the entire continent of Europe.

Which, as Macgregor, Martynov, and every competent observer of the last two years very well knows, is something that neither Putin nor any of the Russian generals want. Both the Russians and their Chinese counterparts have witnessed how empire and the foreign occupations it requires destroyed both British and American societies within decades. Even Israel’s micro-empire in Palestine is now causing tremendous rifts in Israeli society due to the current expansionary efforts.

Fortunately, the US is not very unlikely to intervene directly, because its primary concern is now the Southeast Asian front it is desperately trying to shore up in Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Vietnam. And while it may try to use the Poles, the French, the Finns, and the Germans as a second proxy force in Ukraine, I expect all of the various attempts in this regard to fail as soon as it becomes impossible for the European media to hide the true state of affairs and the complete imbalance of power that currently prevails on the continent from the voters of the European nations. Fear of the Russians might sway the Poles, the Baltics, and the Finns, but the possibility of war won’t increase support for the current governments anywhere else, most of which are already unpopular due to the migrant invasions.

If there is one thing I have learned while living in Europe for nearly 30 years, it is that Europeans are very nearly as clueless about the USA as Americans are about Europe. Much like the US Boomers, even the Millennial Europeans believe that the USA of today is essentially the same as the USA of the 1950s. That’s why the average Finn and the average Swede are genuinely naive enough to believe that the US military can protect them from the Russians when they might as reasonably rely upon Japan or Botswana to do so.

But it’s pretty clear that Putin and his generals have already concluded that only an actual demonstration of sufficient force will serve to impose a more realistic perspective on the delusional leaders of the erstwhile West, which is why I anticipate more unexpected fireworks and major infrastructural collapses this summer.

DISCUSS ON SG

If You Thought it was Bad Now

Don’t worry. Those fine minds in government already know it’s going to get worse, even if they’re not prepared to admit it openly yet.

“The coming period of recession will … accelerate the decline in living standards that the younger generations have already witnessed compared to earlier generations,” reads the report, entitled Whole-of-Government Five-Year Trends for Canada. “For example, many Canadians under 35 are unlikely ever to be able to buy a place to live,” it adds.

The report, labelled secret, is intended as a piece of “special operational information” to be distributed only within the RCMP and among “decision-makers” in the federal government.

A heavily redacted version was made public as a result of an access to information request filed by Matt Malone, an assistant professor of law at British Columbia’s Thompson Rivers University, and an expert in government secrecy.

Describing itself in an introduction as a “scanning exercise,” the report is intended to highlight trends in both Canada and abroad “that could have a significant effect on the Canadian government and the RCMP.”

Right from the get-go, the report authors warn that whatever Canada’s current situation, it “will probably deteriorate further in the next five years.”

We always knew that the age of prosperity had to end sometime. And apparently, that time was 2008. Everything since then has merely been positioning and bracing for impact while running up the tab before the bar burns down.

This isn’t necessarily going to be a bad thing for some people, for in chaos there is always opportunity. But the degree of difficulty is increasing, and the old reliable rules for success no longer necessarily apply.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Wicked Generation: British Boomer Edition

A British millennial belatedly realizes that his parents’ spending on their travel addiction is rendering impossible his ability to buy a home and build a family:

As an impecunious 34-year-old millennial in an impossibly expensive property market, I am relying on, at some stage, a handout from them. But all I can see is my money receding into the distance on a long-haul trip to Bali.

With many of my friends in a similar position, and the cost of living crisis still at full throttle, the question troubling us over the generational divide is this. Who is being selfish? Us for wanting them to save their money so we can one day have it? Or them, for splurging it all so freely on themselves?

At the start of their travel spree, about five years ago, I loved the bravery and ambition of it. Growing up, we usually went to Devon or Cornwall once a year. But when there was just the two of them (my younger sister and I have long since flown the nest), they could afford to globe trot. For a bit.

Well, good for them, I thought. Let them, in their late 60s, have a couple of lovely holidays, before settling into a cosy retirement at home.

The problem was it didn’t stop at just one or two. It didn’t even stop at three or four…

How can I ever settle down and give them grandchildren if there isn’t any money in the pipeline to support them? Do they want to go on holiday more than they want me to be able to have and bring up children?

I’m not alone in agonising over where my parents’ hard-earned money is going. According to a survey by an online wealth management advice firm called Moneyfarm, two in five adult children feel their ‘blood boiling’ at the idea their parents are blowing their inheritance on luxury holidays.

Among adult children aged between 35 and 50, 40 per cent thought their parents should provide them with an inheritance (compared with 25 per cent aged over 65) — and 20 per cent had already argued with them about what was going to be left.

Another friend admits she puts phone notifications from her mum on silent when her parents go ‘gallivanting abroad’ — because all the pictures of dreamy destinations make her jealous. And resentful.

‘My inheritance is currently being drunk through a straw in a coconut in the Caribbean,’ she says. ‘It’s going to be slim pickings at this rate.’

These Millennials are not being selfish or ungrateful. And their expectations were not unreasonable. What these parents are doing is flat-out wrong. It is unquestionably evil.

There will be no short of foolish and philosophically-bent individuals who will defend these wicked Boomers as simply “living their best life” or “spending their own money”. But those are both obvious lies. Even setting aside the very different economic climates facing the generations concerned, the Boomers inherited more financial resources from their parents and grandparents than any generation in human history. And, on average, what they are leaving behind them is considerably less than they themselves received.

Nota Bene: 10 percent of the total UK tax receipts are spent funding Boomer state pensions.

And as far as the “it’s their money, not yours”, the Bible is very, very clear on what a good man is supposed to do with regards to providing for his children. The Contemporary English Version even spells it out slowly in simple language for the benefit of even the most retarded reader.

If you obey God, you will have something to leave your grandchildren. If you don’t obey God, those who live right will get what you leave.

We’re spending your inheritance! Tee-hee!

UPDATE: We have definite confirmation that it’s almost entirely Boomers reading The Daily Mail these days. This is the second-worst rated comment, with a highly negative ratio of 38 upvotes and 620 downvotes.

If I was this young man’s parent I would make sure he and sister were on the property ladder and can rent rooms out before going off on Jollies. I sincerely hope the house is left to the two children.

DISCUSS ON SG

Always. Use. Cash.

If you’re not using cash every chance you get, you’re literally part of the problem:

Sainsbury’s is battling a major IT meltdown on one of the busiest shopping days of the week and has left customers fuming after suffering an ‘error with an overnight software update’ that has prevented the supermarket from being able to fulfil online orders or accept contactless payments at the tills.

Stores across the UK are battling a major ‘technical issue’ that has left customers ‘disappointed’ and forced to turn to rival Tesco to complete their Saturday shop.

Frustrated customers say they cannot pay at the tills, while company bosses admit the firm is ‘experiencing issues with contactless payments’ and also ‘will not be able to fulfil the vast majority of today’s Groceries Online deliveries’.

Look, there are many situations that one simply has to use electronic payments, such as when one is not in a face-to-face transaction. But this recent payment failure at Sainsbury’s illustrates the absolute need for cash, which is why it is incumbent upon everyone to insist on cash transactions for all of your face-to-face transactions.

I don’t even have a debit card, much less one of those smartphone app payment methods. And this isn’t because I’m a Boomer who hates and fears newfangled technology, but because I understand exactly where all this “contactless” electronic payment tech is ultimately heading.

Don’t help pave the way for the Mark of the Beast. Don’t participate in it. Don’t make it easier for them.

DISCUSS ON SG

Economics, Reconsidered

In which the Professor of Economics and International Affairs, Emeritus, at Princeton and 2015 recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences begins to wonder if perhaps everything about the mainstream Neo-Samuelsonian economics he has been utilizing as his basic conceptual model is wrong:

Economics has achieved much; there are large bodies of often nonobvious theoretical understandings and of careful and sometimes compelling empirical evidence. The profession knows and understands many things. Yet today we are in some disarray. We did not collectively predict the financial crisis and, worse still, we may have contributed to it through an overenthusiastic belief in the efficacy of markets, especially financial markets whose structure and implications we understood less well than we thought…

Like many others, I have recently found myself changing my mind, a discomfiting process for someone who has been a practicing economist for more than half a century…

I am much more skeptical of the benefits of free trade to American workers and am even skeptical of the claim, which I and others have made in the past, that globalization was responsible for the vast reduction in global poverty over the past 30 years. I also no longer defend the idea that the harm done to working Americans by globalization was a reasonable price to pay for global poverty reduction because workers in America are so much better off than the global poor. I believe that the reduction in poverty in India had little to do with world trade. And poverty reduction in China could have happened with less damage to workers in rich countries if Chinese policies caused it to save less of its national income, allowing more of its manufacturing growth to be absorbed at home. I had also seriously underthought my ethical judgments about trade-offs between domestic and foreign workers. We certainly have a duty to aid those in distress, but we have additional obligations to our fellow citizens that we do not have to others.

I used to subscribe to the near consensus among economists that immigration to the US was a good thing, with great benefits to the migrants and little or no cost to domestic low-skilled workers. I no longer think so. Economists’ beliefs are not unanimous on this but are shaped by econometric designs that may be credible but often rest on short-term outcomes. Longer-term analysis over the past century and a half tells a different story. Inequality was high when America was open, was much lower when the borders were closed, and rose again post Hart-Celler (the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965) as the fraction of foreign-born people rose back to its levels in the Gilded Age. It has also been plausibly argued that the Great Migration of millions of African Americans from the rural South to the factories in the North would not have happened if factory owners had been able to hire the European migrants they preferred.

Economists could benefit by greater engagement with the ideas of philosophers, historians, and sociologists, just as Adam Smith once did. The philosophers, historians, and sociologists would likely benefit too.

I can’t cast too many stones in the eminent Prof. Deaton’s direction. I, too, once believed that free trade was economically beneficial to both nations involved in the trade. I, too, once believed that the free movement of peoples was a net benefit to the economy and the well-being of the peoples involved. And while I was always deeply skeptical of, and completely opposed to, globalization, it wasn’t until fairly recently that I recognized the satanic thread that runs through and inevitably connects liberty, democracy, the liberal Enlightenment values, and economic liberalism to obvious evils like globalism, imperialism, techno-authoritarianism, and Clown World.

But the lies, some of them centuries-old, are shattering. They are being broken apart by finally being tested against real-world consequences. And in the aftermath of their discrediting, an entirely new economics, one that is not based on a false model of a perfectly rational economic man, will be constructed.

DISCUSS ON SG

Convergence Kills US Semiconductors

There’s also an interesting geopolitical strategic assumption buried deep in this article on the chip-making industry’s abandonment of the USA, which is particularly intriguing in light of the audience for The Hill:

The Biden administration recently promised it will finally loosen the purse strings on $39 billion of CHIPS Act grants to encourage semiconductor fabrication in the U.S. But less than a week later, Intel announced that it’s putting the brakes on its Columbus factory. The Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has pushed back production at its second Arizona foundry. The remaining major chipmaker, Samsung, just delayed its first Texas fab.

This is not the way companies typically respond to multi-billion-dollar subsidies. So what explains chipmakers’ apparent ingratitude? In large part, frustration with DEI requirements embedded in the CHIPS Act.

Commentators have noted that CHIPS and Science Act money has been sluggish. What they haven’t noticed is that it’s because the CHIPS Act is so loaded with DEI pork that it can’t move.

The law contains 19 sections aimed at helping minority groups, including one creating a Chief Diversity Officer at the National Science Foundation, and several prioritizing scientific cooperation with what it calls “minority-serving institutions.” A section called “Opportunity and Inclusion” instructs the Department of Commerce to work with minority-owned businesses and make sure chipmakers “increase the participation of economically disadvantaged individuals in the semiconductor workforce.”

The department interprets that as license to diversify. Its factsheet asserts that diversity is “critical to strengthening the U.S. semiconductor ecosystem,” adding, “Critically, this must include significant investments to create opportunities for Americans from historically underserved communities.”

The department does not call speed critical, even though the impetus for the CHIPS Act is that 90 percent of the world’s advanced microchips are made in Taiwan, which China is preparing to annex by 2027, maybe even 2025.

Handouts abound. There’s plenty for the left—requirements that chipmakers submit detailed plans to educate, employ, and train lots of women and people of color, as well as “justice-involved individuals,” more commonly known as ex-cons. There’s plenty for the right—veterans and members of rural communities find their way into the typical DEI definition of minorities. There’s even plenty for the planet: Arizona Democrats just bragged they’ve won $15 million in CHIPS funding for an ASU project fighting climate change.

That project is going better for Arizona than the actual chips part of the CHIPS Act. Because equity is so critical, the makers of humanity’s most complex technology must rely on local labor and apprentices from all those underrepresented groups, as TSMC discovered to its dismay.

Tired of delays at its first fab, the company flew in 500 employees from Taiwan. This angered local workers, since the implication was that they weren’t skilled enough. With CHIPS grants at risk, TSMC caved in December, agreeing to rely on those workers and invest more in training them. A month later, it postponed its second Arizona fab.

Now TSMC has revealed plans to build a second fab in Japan. Its first, which broke ground in 2021, is about to begin production. TSMC has learned that when the Japanese promise money, they actually give it, and they allow it to use competent workers. TSMC is also sampling Germany’s chip subsidies, as is Intel.

Intel is also building fabs in Poland and Israel, which means it would rather risk Russian aggression and Hamas rockets over dealing with America’s DEI regime. Samsung is pivoting toward making its South Korean homeland the semiconductor superpower after Taiwan falls.

In short, the world’s best chipmakers are tired of being pawns in the CHIPS Act’s political games. They’ve quietly given up on America.

DEI killed the CHIPS Act, THE HILL, 7 March 2024

Notice that it’s not “if” Taiwan falls but rather “when”, complete with an estimated range of dates from 2025 to 2027. This may also explain Victoria Nuland’s fall from grace at the State Department, as the pivot to China from Russia is clearly underway.

DISCUSS ON SG

The End of Demonetization

The BRICS alliance – which is to say Russia and China – is taking direct aim at the ability of Clown World’s credit system to demonetize individuals, organizations, and nations of which it disapproves:

The BRICS group of emerging economies plans to create a payment system based on digital technologies, Yury Ushakov, a senior foreign policy aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, has told TASS in an interview published on Tuesday.

According to Ushakov, the system would be “outside of politics” and would not depend on national agendas or the fiat currencies of countries around the globe.

“We believe that an important goal for the future is the creation within the BRICS framework of an independent settlement payment system that would be based on the most modern technologies, such as digital currencies and blockchain,” Ushakov stated. “It would be comfortable for any state, person and business, and would not require significant costs.” The presidential aide did not specify the details or the time frame for the development of the new system.

Now, this could certainly be a case of exchanging King Log for King Stork. But it appears the Russians and Chinese have learned from watching the demise of the UK and the USA, and that neither of them are eager to assume the crown of foreign corruption that history teaches inevitably comes with empire and ruling over foreign peoples.

And this will be a very good thing for both the BRICSIA alliance as well as the persecuted people and organizations living under Clown World’s increasingly despotic rule. As with sanctions, the practice of demonitization is going to backfire with catastrophic results for the organizations that engage in it, as they will no longer be able to compete effectively with more trustworthy competitors upon whom their clients can rely.

DISCUSS ON SG

The American Dream is Over

Forget the next generation living better lives than their parents did. That ended with Generation X, the 1986 Immigration Amnesty, and NAFTA. But the next two generations are seeing even the standard to which their great-great-grandparents were accustomed is now beyond them.

Recent analysis by Investopedia revealed that you now need a whopping $3.4 million to cover the costs of traditional American dream milestones such as marriage, raising children and owning a home. But most Americans fall short of that target by over a million dollars. The average lifetime earnings of Americans across all education levels is closer to $2.3 million, according to Investopedia, leaving a big financial gap that’s forcing people to reassess their life goals.

One look at the attainability of a basic element of the traditional American dream — homeownership — is telling.

According to real estate brokerage Redfin, 2023 was the least affordable year for home buying on record. To buy a median-priced home, worth $408,806, with the median U.S. income $78,642, you would’ve had to spend a record 41.4% of your earnings on housing costs, up from 38.7% in 2022 and 31.0% in 2021. To buy that same home without spending more than 30% of your income — a popular rule of thumb among personal finance experts — you would need an annual salary of $109,868, according to Redfin, which is $31,226 more than the typical household makes in a year.

It was a nice run. But Americans should have listened to Ben Franklin. Once the 1965 Immigration Act passed after 40 years of relentless agitation, the fate of the USA was sealed.

DISCUSS ON SG

The End of Economic Ideology

There is no more economic Left or Right in Clown World. Because once a government starts primarily distributing national resources on the basis of identity groups and foreign interests, everyone on both extremes of the ideological divide realizes that there is no more national interest, any appeal to it is pointless, and therefore there is absolutely no point in working toward anything but maximal distribution to their own identity groups.

On Sunday, 58.2% of Swiss voters, and a majority of cantons, backed the “Better living in retirement” initiativeExternal link, which will grant an additional 13th monthly pension payment to help retirees struggling to make ends meet in the face of rising living costs.

Support for the 13th monthly pension payment initiative was exceptionally high. What is your analysis of the Swiss vote?

This is the first time that Swiss voters have clearly accepted a left-wing initiative in the field of social policy. The success can be explained by the fact that it was not just a left-wing vote. The initiative also resonated widely with centre-right voters and, above all, the conservative right. And, in their case, it was less about solidarity and compensating for the poverty of pensioners and much more about ‘now it’s my turn’.

Where does this idea come from?

It is a protest against the past excesses of the economy – the fall of Credit Suisse, the high salaries of managers, the past rescue of UBS and the rescue plan for [the energy company] Axpo. There is a widespread sentiment that Switzerland is able to mobilise very large sums of money for crises like the Covid-19 pandemic for big businesses, while ordinary people do not benefit. The population has the impression that business readily helps itself to any profits while passing on losses to society. There is a now willingness to change this.

It was perhaps another argument, which was very popular in conservative circles, that helped to topple the country’s most conservative strongholds, particularly in German-speaking Switzerland: if the Swiss authorities are capable of spending billions of francs on development aid and welcoming refugees, then we should do the same for pensioners. Even the country’s most seasoned political scientists are at a loss. Never before has an initiative from the left and the unions sparked such sympathy among right-wing voters.

This is why both liberalism and conservatism are dead across the West, and have been replaced by globalism vs nationalism combined with international identity politics on the foreign policy side and pure identity politics on the domestic side.

What is the point of being fiscally conservative or not spending every last bit of money on yourself while it lasts if the politicians are just going to use it to import refugees, send the money to Israel or Ukraine, or bailing out failed corporations if you don’t? It’s an irrefutable argument, and this is why Clown World will inevitably, and necessarily, turn against its own sacred cow of democracy before it collapses.

DISCUSS ON SG