Obama

Jacinda, time to deal with fects

Jacinda

NZ PM Jacinda Ardern! You may be the high priestess of wokeness but sadly you need to have a better grasp of numbers. CM already detailed that Australia is more generous by a considerable currency-adjusted per capita margin than your Wellness Budget. Look at the ratio of Kiwis living in Aus vs Aussies living in NZ. 570,000 plays 37,000.

Sledging Aussie PM Scott Morrison may win brownie points with the left (and the global mainstream media cheerleading squad will find you faultless) but here are some facts you might consider before you speak:

  1. China is 45% of global coal powergen. China has over 1,000 coal plants in operation. A further 126 are under construction and another 72 are in the planning stage. Australia has only 2 in the pipeline.
  2. China has grown CO2 emissions from 10.6% of the global total atmosphere in 1990 to 29.3% today. Australia has slipped from 1.21% to 1.08% respectively. You are but a spec.
  3. Since 1990, Australia’s CO2 emissions per capita have risen by 1.8%. NZ has grown by 10.8%. Yes, we emit more CO2 per capita in gross terms because we have a monster mining industry that you don’t. Australia’s impact on global CO2 is 0.0000134% of the total atmosphere. Yours is 0.00000124%. Nothing. So no matter what we do, our impact via virtue signalling will account for zero. Feel free to flash those pearly whites to the adoration of the sheep that think you should lead a global government. No thanks.

The NZ PM’s Wellness Budget has received lots of accolades. A true leader! Champagne socialist Sir Richard Branson also praised her saying other countries should take note. Despite owning an airline…

The idea that a budget should be solely based on economics is not progressive and more should be directed at “well-being”. That is not to say this budget is not “well-intentioned”. However, the statistics compared to across the ditch do not fare well in relative terms.

Comparing her newest policies versus Australia reveals the kangaroos get better access to social services than the kiwis. How surprising that none of the mainstream media bothered to look at the budget numbers on a like for like basis? Just praise her because she represents their ideal version of a socialist leader.  CM has looked through both budgets and adjusted for currency to make for easier like-for-like comparisons.

When it comes to health spending per capita (currency-adjusted), Australia is expected to climb from A$3,324 in 2019 to A$3,568 in 2022. NZ is expected to go up slightly from A$3,516 to A$3,561 respectively.

On social security and welfare, Australia is expected to pay out A$7,322 per capita in 2019, growing to A$7,977. NZ, on the other hand, is forecast to go from A$5,573 per head to A$6,489.

On mental health, Australia forked out around A$9.1bn exclusively on these services reaching 4.2m citizens last year. NZ is planning on spending A$45.1m in 2019 with a total of A$428m by 2023/24 to hit 325,000 people on frontline services for mental health. While the move is a positive one, NZ will allocate A$1.78bn to mental health as a whole over 5 years. On an annualised basis, Australia will still allocate 5x the NZ amount to mental health per capita. So much for wellbeing.

On education, NZ plans to increase per capita spending 7.9% between 2019 and 2022 whereas Australia will lift it 12.5% over the same period. NZ spends around 2x Australia per capita on education although PISA scores between 2006 and 2015 are virtually identical (and both heading south)

On public housing, Ardern can claim a victory. Australia is expected to cut spending per capita from A$240 in 2019 to A$194 in 2022 when NZ will go from A$137 to A$282. Although let’s hope Ardern has more success than her KiwiBuild policy. The Australian’s Judith Sloanrightly pointed out,

“Ardern also has stumbled with other policies, most notably KiwiBuild. The pledge was to build 100,000 additional affordable homes by 2028.

It has since been modified to facili­tation by the government to help build new homes. Moreover, the definition of afford­ability has been altered from between $NZ350,000 ($340,000) and $NZ450,000 to $NZ650,000.

What started off as an ill-considered public housing project has turned out to be an extremely unsuccessful private real estate scam. The government estimated that there would be 1000 homes built last year under KiwiBuild; it turned out to be 47.”

Good news KiwiBuild has made it to 250.

 

Mental Illness = Gun Violence?

As ever, the mainstream media are sensationalizing “mental health” and the connection to gun massacres. Let’s not forget that mental health can be categorized in a broad variety of ways – from mild anxiety, ADHD to PTSD and full blown bi-polar or schizophrenia. The mainstream media would have us believe that Trump wants the keys to the gun cabinet handed over to certified crackpots to go on white supremacist fueled mass rampages. It is easy to say that those who commit these atrocities must be mad. How easy is it to fall for that assumption? Yet the stats say otherwise.

First, what is this bill that has been repealed by Trump? Why is the media making such clickbait hyperventilating news of something that was already enacted c.2 years ago?

The previous Obama bill allowed gun retailers to get access to “mental health” related social security benefits paid to potential buyers. There are nine categories of mental disorders covered in the Social Security Blue Book. These include:

Affective disorders

Anxiety Disorders

Autism and related disorders

Mental retardation

Organic Mental Disorders

Personality disorders

Schizophrenia, paranoia, and psychotic disorders

Somatoform disorders

Substance addiction

The idea is that if one had claustrophobia or similar mild anxiety, it would be unlikely to be a factor in causing someone to shoot up a Walmart. In order to get mental health disability checks, the applicant must prove compliance to prescribed medication and that they seek regular treatment from professionals. Why do we automatically assume that mental health status is a direct trigger to mass murder? Simply because it is easy to categorize these events to unhinged crazies and presume that there was ‘illness’ involved.

A study conducted by the National Institute of Health (NIH) in America showed,

Thirty-four subjects, acting alone or in pairs, committed 27 mass murders between 1958 and 1999. The sample consisted of males with a median age of 17. 70% were described as a loner. 61.5% had problems with substance abuse. 48% had preoccupations with weapons. 43.5% had been victims of bullying. Although 23% had a documented psychiatric history, only 6% were judged to have been psychotic at the time of the mass murder. Depressive symptoms and historical antisocial behaviors were predominant. There was a precipitating event in most cases–usually a perceived failure in love or school–and most subjects made threatening statements regarding the mass murder to third parties. The majority of the sample clustered into three types: the family annihilator, the classroom avenger, and the criminal opportunist.”

Recall Cuban Parkland, Florida student Emma Gonzalez admitted she’d bullied the shooter Nikolas Cruz. It doesn’t excuse his actions. Nor hers.

Take cyber bullying stats from the Association of Psychological Science in the US. In 2015 more than 16,000 young people were absent from school daily because of bullying. 83% of young people say cyber bullying has a negative impact on their self-esteem. 30% of young people have gone on to self-harm as a result of cyberbullying. 10% of young people have attempted to commit suicide as a result of cyberbullying.

So the stats tell us in 3 out of 4 cases, mental illness was not the culprit in mass shootings. A violent/bullying, substance abuse based environment was.

As mentioned in the previous post, how is it we can find out about the history of shooters within hours of the terror? Surely the powers at the FBI, NSA etc can monitor the traffic of hate – death lists, death threats etc and use that as the basis of background checks rather than rely on whether someone received mental health related disability cheques? Perhaps someone who is fully healed from a mental illness as a child poses no threat if wanting to hunt or fire at a supervised gun range. Perhaps that individual wants to be a security guard?

Dr Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral science at the Duke University School of Medicine believes that in the event of unlawful use of a firearm by those with mental illness, 95% likely to turn the weapon on themselves than commit homicide.

He also believes that those who are violent or been charged with assault make far better predictors of homicidal behavior than the outcome of a mental health diagnosis.

In Connecticut, almost 23,300 people were diagnosed with a history of serious mental illness. 7% were disqualified from owning a gun because of that mental record. 35% were banned based on a disqualifying criminal record that wasn’t necessarily linked to the mental illness.

Dr. Swanson closed with,

We need to think of violence itself as a communicable disease. We have kids growing up exposed to terrible trauma. We did a study some years ago, looking at [violence risk] among people with serious mental illness. The three risk factors we found were most important: first, a history of violent victimization early in life, second, substance abuse, and the third is exposure to violence in the environment around you. People who had none of those risk factors ― even with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia ― had very low rates of violent behavior…Abuse, violence in the environment around you ― those are the kinds of things you’re not going to solve by having someone take a mood stabilizer.”

Sadly such is the state of lazy journalism that ‘respected media outlets’ simply infer that those that commit mass murder are simply head cases and giving them access to guns will somehow create a bigger problem. That’s how the mainstream media is portraying a 2-yr old bill to whip up more misunderstanding.

Who’d a thunk?

Dr. Rex Fleming, a former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) atmospheric scientist has broken his silence on the cabal running the show. He has left the administration citing,

– data was manipulated inside NOAA by numerous individuals under the Obama era. They changed ocean data, atmospheric data. They wouldn’t own up to weather stations which would give inflated data to support their warming.

– the American Meteorological Society (AMS), the American Geophysical Union (AGU), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) refuse to publish scientific papers from scientists (including Fleming) it considers “deniers“. Fleming was forced to go to Europe to have the 2018 paper peer-reviewed and published. So much for seeking balance.

– CO2 has risen because of warm temperatures. Not the other way around. 420,000 years of zero correlation of CO2 leading temperature. Can’t all of a sudden claim correlation of C02 leading temperature. Therefore it can’t be a cause.

– He said many scientists within NOAA agree that this is the truth yet are afraid to speak out. He said many scientists risked being fired for speaking out against the orthodoxy. This is why many are speaking out when they leave NOAA.

– more scientists are making no effort shifting away from anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW)because they are “in this groove of getting funds for huge, bigger computer systems to run these massive climate models. And they want their salaries to increase. They don’t want to change.”

Where have we seen this before? James Cook University bullying Professor Peter Ridd for not towing the party line? To have them lose a court case against him and to then double down by telling the judge he is wrong and spending another $600,000+ on a retrial.

The podcast can be found here.

How badly do the left want to lose the 2020 election?

It seems the left can’t contain their Trump Derangement Syndrome. In Brooklyn, one advertiser has placed mini Trump statues for dogs to urinate on.

The question is with the level sinking ever lower in the way TDS is displayed, do the Dems honestly think they have a chance at the 2020 election with such openly childish antics? It was only last year when a comedian pretended to urinate on Trump’s Hollywood Star.

Imagine if an Obama statue was put out for dogs to urinate on? We wouldn’t hear the end of it.

Drinking out of toilets?

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claimed that those in border detention centres were forced to drink from toilets. Technically speaking the water fountains are attached to the toilet. The detention facilities have such combined units for space saving reasons. This is a picture from the Department of Justice in 2015.

As can be seen by the constant court filings against inhumane conditions, it is clear these complaints have been made since Obama’s time in office.

Note this from June 8th, 2015:

Immigrant rights groups have filed a class-action lawsuit challenging detention conditions in CBP (Customs and Border Protection) detention facilities. The complaint alleges that Tucson Sector Border Patrol holds men, women, and children in freezing, overcrowded, and filthy cells for days at a time in violation of the U.S. Constitution and CBP’s own policies. Detained individuals are stripped of outer layers of clothing and forced to suffer in brutally cold temperatures; deprived of beds, bedding, and sleep; denied adequate food, water, medicine and medical care, and basic sanitation and hygiene items such as soap, sufficient toilet paper, sanitary napkins, diapers, and showers; and held virtually incommunicado in these conditions for days.”

Why do politicians insist on hyperventilating when the reality soon gets discovered?

Trump vs Obama

From Rasmussen today:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 33% of Likely U.S. Voters think life for young black Americans has gotten better since Trump’s election. Slightly more (36%) say life is worse for young blacks now, while 22% rate it as about the same. These findings have changed very little from a year ago. 

By comparison, in July 2016, Obama’s final year in office, just 13% said life for young black Americans had gotten better since the election of the nation’s first black president.”

Greta & Obama

A propaganda picture which would have had a place in Soviet times. A socialist leader Obama looking down on a brainwashed teenager, Great Thunberg, who is unbeknownst being exploited by the intelligentsia.

The picture, while excellent as a stand-alone photo, has a patronizing overtone. The disdain held against those wicked climate skeptics. Had NZ PM Jacinda Ardern been in it, the leftist dream team would have been fully assembled. Although her 2050 zero emissions plan has been independently costed and its outrageous.

Obama better not tell Greta Thunberg about the disastrous Solyndra scandal otherwise those crossed arms might end up being for him.

Solyndra was an Obama era solar darling that the Inspector General’s Office, after more than four years of investigation, concluded that company’s senior management used inaccurate information to mislead the Department of Energy (DoE) in its $535 million loan. Soon after the fees landed, Solyndra declared bankruptcy.

Perhaps Greta should be speaking to Bjorn Lomborg to get a proper education on the real price of costing her plans for climate change.