Fileschade

De fileschade blijft stijgen. Welke les leert het volk daarvan, behalve dan dat we niets hebben aan een roverheid?

Bovendien is economische schade een slecht argument, want dat vwordt al een halve eeuw (bijna 52 jaar, dus RUIM een halve eeuw) tevergeefs gebruikt om te proberen meer asfalt te krijgen. Maar ja: men piept al jaren over CO2 en zelfs nu blijven ze weigeren om de files op te lossen.

Advertisements

“Rechtsstaat”… !

Ongeloveloos, dat men drugs blijft verbieden en het heeft over dat de gevolgen van dat verbod een ramp zijn voor de rechtsstaat! Waarom zouden ze verboden zijn? Dat veroorzaakt alleen maar misdaad. Een “War over drugs”,ipv een “War against drugs”, die talloze wetten breekt, en dus een ramp is voor de rechtsstaat.

De hervorming nadert voltooïing

Paul Joseph Timmermans wil de burger “hulpmiddelen” aanreiken om “nepnieuws te herkennen”. Mijn grote goedheid, eerst hadden we de Stasi-praktijken van de NSA (letterlijk StaSi), nu gaan we nog verder terug in de tijd, met Göbelse praktijken, om de hersenspoeling volledig te maken. Nu nog de staatscourant hernoemen tot Pravda, en de hervorming is volledig. 

Rutte3 en de geldverspilling

Klinkt bijna als de titel van een Sherlock Holmes-avontuur, alleen heet de schuldige hier niet Moriarty, maar Mark.
De verkwisters op deze foto (mugshot):
Eric Wiebes en Cora van Nieuwenhuizen (EZ & klimaat; Infrastructuur & Waterstaat)
Dat ze Klimaat bij EZ hebben ondergebracht, is veelzeggend over de echte beweegredenen achter het klimaatgezeik: ons meer geld afhandig maken. (Ik weet trouwens nog steeds niet wat EZ in vredesnaam doet)
Arie Slob en Ingrid van Engelshoven (Basis- en voortgezet onderwijs & media; Onderwijs, Cultuur & Wetenschap)
Beetje dubbelop, niet? Of gelden Basis- en voortgezet onderwijs niet meer als onderwijs? Heb ik even mijn jeugd verspild!

Change, revisited

https://ludwigvanel.wordpress.com/2017/10/12/a-change-aint-gonna-come-unless-you-make-it/

Part of the reason I wrote the above post is that I’d wish the evil institution (politics) would look at how they are causing effects they claim to be upset about. Classic example: I’ve mentioned it several times already: here in the Netherlands, the people have been suffering from traffic jams, for over half a century (in 2017: 51 years! Since 1966).

And the political movements that complain the loudest about emmissions (and climate change) are the ones that spend most time frustrating solutions for the transportation congestion question. Instead of making more roads they keep repeating the same lullaby: “Bus, train!” over and over again, which has never helped; instead of learning from that, they double down on the citizenry, to teach them (us) a lesson of obedience.
Of course unless they act, a change in emmission levels is never gonna come.
Yes, they must act, because they made the law such that only they can: the people are powerless (I have a whole pile of rejection notices from parliament, announcing they’ve received my letters and chosen to do nothing with them, so there’s no excuse, certainly no “Wir haben es nicht gewüst”.)

Referendums in Europe

BTW, if you can find a video by Matt Carthy MEP, view it, the guy’s brilliant, #UKIP has found a worthy spiritual successor. This is a very good one by @mattcarthy https://twitter.com/mattcarthy/status/915600381924790277?s=09

Spain had no moral right to declare this expression of the people illegal. They certainly had no democratic right to do so; a government (even a #junta) only ever has the right to listen to the people. Never any other right.

#Referendums in #Europe are a tragic cause: just look at the last 3 referendums held in the Netherlands.

  1. European constitution: rejected by a majority, so it was renamed and imposed anyway.
  2. IJburg (an artificial island in a river at Amsterdam to create more housing), rejected by 60%, but by way of a dirty trick (an advisory, not a binding referendum), the regime managed to have its way and cause all the environmental damage that 60% voted against.
  3. association treaty with the Ukrayne: the majority voted against, a blow to the prestige of PM Mark Rutte who was the serving president at the time (a rolling fuction, the person & country gets changed), so they desperately went searching for an underhanded means to,push it through anywau.

So, to sum up: #referendums (a #democratic tool) have no place in Europe, because there is no #democracy here.

Further proof: when, much to the displeasure of the political caste, the people had gathered enough autographs to enforce a referendum about the association treaty with the Ukrayne, the scumbags took to campaigning to influence the outcome of the referendum. That failed, so they did the next best thing and igored the outcone, tried to weasel their way anyway.

The root of it vs desperate patching

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/08/opinion/dreamers-liars-and-bad-economics.html

Via http://contrakrugman.com/103

Basically, what Paul Krugman is saying in that column, is, that it’s silly to rely on government for social services for the elderly. But instead of yanking the problem out by the root, and letting citizens arrange their own entitlements, Krugman calls for desperate patching of the demographic problems, by inviting more people into the country. I’m not opposed to people moving into an area (even if that area is in a different city, or even country), but Krugman’s approach is just to push the problem forward, causing future generations to having to handle their own (much worse?) demographic issues. This demonstrates the problem innate to Krugman’s economical theory: Keynesianism, which does the exqct same thing, but not with people, but with the economy (so: yes, with people).

Surely, there’s an easy argument to be made for curing the problem right now and removing government from this equation (statelessness would be ideal, but simply banning government from this role will perform miracles)