Vanity

Why Ocasio-Cortez is the most powerful weapon in the Dem’s arsenal

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s 5 minute “if I was a bad guy” routine in the House Oversight & Reform Committee went viral. 19m views. Such is the love of selective editing by the media that the video seemed to completely absolve her of the ridiculous Green New Deal plan which incidentally was pulled from her own website. She looked totally on message. However…

…Sadly, the unedited follow up saw the IFS Chairman Bradley A. Smith correct the record of the misleading questioning of AOC. She’s only 29 and on the fast track of learning the ugly world of politics.

The Democrats, as CM has said before, are missing a huge opportunity. She is a media darling. Instead of dragging her inside the tent and weaponizing her huge and growing following (especially millennials) with the pre-rehearsed party platform, Pelosi snubbed her from the Climate Change Panel and dismissed AOC’s manifesto as a “Green Dream.” Talk about eating your own kind. Better to have AOC on the panel to keep a leash on her media circle.

The longer they allow AOC to go off uncocked without the safety on, there will become a point where she passes the point of no return. The Democrats will lose probably their best asset. The longer she stays isolated, the more damage she will end up doing to the core of the party.

The Democrats need to show a united face in 2020. When lead candidate Kamala Harris endorses AOC’s plan without reading it, it only looks like a case of friendly fire. Is that what voters want to see? Expediency?

AOC is causing ructions. If the 70yo+ old guard party elites within the Democratic Party continue to treat her like a dotty 29yo, they’ll turn the weapon of their own making on themselves. That’s great news if you’re Republican.

If the Green New Deal bans air travel…

…CM looks forward to catching a train to Hawaii.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also intends to get every fossil fueled powered car off the road in a decade. The US has 270 million registered vehicles, the overwhelming majority being petrol powered. The US sells 16-17mn cars a year (sadly slowing). Therefore in the US, 16 years would be required to achieve that target. That’s before taking into account auto maker EV capacity.

Global EV sales were 2.1mn last year. So her plan would take 128 years. That’s unfair as capacity would grow. Let’s assume auto makers could conceivably increase capacity by 2m every 2 years (plants take 2 years to build and those poor Congolese child slave laborers will be run off their feet digging for cobalt to go in the batteries) then conceivably 30mn.cumulative EV units could be built over 10 years. That’s 11% of her goal. Let’s not forget the fossil fuels required to power auto factories to satiate this plan not to mention the steel that goes into the bodies.

Global auto production is c.80mn units. That assumes that the world’s auto makers will snub the ROW to meet her demands.

Socialist mathematics is never quite up to the task. Is Ocasio-Cortez was a true patriot she’d demand GM, Ford & Tesla be the sole products that consumers are allowed to buy to support domestic jobs. They’ll need them because she’ll be causing the lay offs of a shed load of Boeing line workers if planes are banned.

When she finally gets into the Oval Office we should look forward to her catching Ground Force One from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Station to travel the country and tell Americans how much better things have become.

Not what you think

In the age of identity politics this hiring advert from McDonalds Sweden is on the money.

The fine print says “We hire individuals. We don’t care what your surname is. Because ambition and determination have nothing to do with your nationality.”

Good on McDonalds for bucking the insidious virtue signaling that pervades so many corporates today.

”We see the good in men”

The Egard watch company took the opposite view of the Gillette campaign. So much for equality!

Stemming the cycling casualty cycle

A cyclist colleague asked CM to look at the stats behind road fatalities of pedal power in Australia. The stats highlight some of the issues.

On the face of it, the authorities would look to the achievements of a reduction in cyclist fatalities and pat each other on the back. 35 cyclist deaths in 2018 is down on the 2013 peak of 50. On balance cyclists are around 2-4% of total road fatalities. Between 2005 and 2009 cyclist fatalities were 2.3% of total and 2010-2014 that rose to 3.2%. In bike friendly ACT, the figures were 2.5% and 7.4% respectively. Total road fatalities fell from 1,600 to around 1,200 over the same period.

A 2015 BITRE report showed that cyclists were 16% of hospitalizations from traffic accidents. The extent of non-fatal crashes is not reported. Note that “fatalities” are only statistically counted when the death occurs inside 30 days. Die in 30 or more days and the stat is not tallied as a road accident.

In 2005/6, 4,370 cyclists were hospitalized nationwide. In 2011 that rose to 5,393 (+23%).

Speed a factor? 45% of crashes according to BITRE happened sub 50km/h. 42% between 50-60 km/h. Of course cyclists aren’t allowed to use dual carriageway which would skew accidents to urban areas.

Cars are responsible for 96% of casualty crashes involving cyclists. 25% of accidents involving a bike and car happen at intersections. No surprises there.

One can get drowned in the analysis but the question is how do we cut the deaths of cyclists if there is a concerted effort to increase their use?

The ‘Australian National Cycling Strategy 2011-2016’ aimed to double cyclist participation. In 2013, another national survey showed cycling numbers drifted down. So if the plan remains to increase usage, it makes sense to allow more shared off-road infrastructure and or dedicated bike lanes.

The question arises on how to tackle the casualty problem. As a motorcyclist it is not hard to be frustrated to see drivers with mobile phone in hand. Cyclists would concur. Whether texting while driving or failing to note a traffic light has changed to green. It is dangerous and frustrating for other road users. Can a social media reply wait 5 minutes? It is often impulsive to pick up the phone and tap away. The punishment for phone use while behind the wheel remains too soft. If drivers don’t focus 100% on conditions then is it any wonder that accidents occur?

ADAS or advanced driver assistance systems (lane guidance, auto braking or wing mirror warning devices) are helping drivers become more alert but at the same time some are becoming too reliant on these devices being failsafe. How often have we seen Tesla drivers crash when the systems don’t work properly? They’re there as a last resort, not a first. Look at the fools who take videos of their Tesla autopilot in action.

It is not to say that cyclists shouldn’t ride with due caution. There are no stats on rogue bikers chopping up cars. We’ve probably encountered an overzealous bike courier who gives the rest a bad reputation. It is fair for drivers to feel frustrated if a cyclist jams himself at speed into a tight gap. Yet it doesn’t justify some drivers whizzing past cyclists in close proximity through pure frustration. Many videos, including those of the late cycling advocate Cameron Frewer, show how selfish some drivers can behave.

Is lowering speed limits the only answer? Perhaps speedo gazers trying to avoid fines create a dangerous loop. Is there an argument to install mobile speed warnings signs that allow drivers to keep eyes glued to the road rather than the speedo needle? At what cost?

Or is it a case or enforcing all vehicles to install drive recorders? In the US more police are wearing body cams to help prove cases against them for excessive force. It wasn’t long ago that dashcam footage helped jail a motorist for 15 years for deliberately ramming a motorcycle. Drive recorders are cheap. Insurance companies would surely approve. Cyclists would do well to wear cameras too.

It ultimately comes down to mutual understanding. While drivers may limit injury through airbags and seatbelts, bikers don’t have that luxury if hit by negligent drivers.

That is not to make cyclists devoid of responsibility but simply having a “Safe System” approach which is a big picture idea of better roads, better conditions and more active/passive safety systems in cars won’t overcome inattentiveness and those keen to check Twitter while moving.

ABC protects one of its own

Good to see the ABC true to form in allocating our tax dollars to look after its own. So if money is so tight, why would it allocate those precious dollars on Clementine Ford who has ‘left’ Nine? What value could she add to convince us to crank up funding? CM wrote a piece on ABC funding and its inefficiency. It’s diabolical.

Ford’s only claim to fame is radical feminist profanity. She has an uncanny ability to call fellow journalists and politicians ‘c*nts’, tweeted “All (non compliant) men must die” among other balanced rhetoric worthy of taxpayer funding.

The ABC has proved that it was already shockingly run under the recent leadership. Now without anyone at the helm it’s open season. To the ABC’s credit, these decisions are made in good faith that the incoming government will grant more funds and any mishaps will he quickly forgotten. Impartiality and ABC are mutually exclusive terms.

The cost of Gillette’s virtue signaling?

Before the ads, Gillette wasn’t on sale and Schick was. Now it’s reversed. One store maybe but the timing seems coincidental.