Mark Cuban – World’s Dumbest Billionaire

The dumbest of the world’s 2,473 billionaires is probably an inbred blue blood who inherited his wealth, the widow or widower of a deceased billionaire, or perhaps somebody who just got lucky. In the latter category, there is one guy who just jumps out at you: Mark Cuban.

Cuban made his billions by selling his company to Yahoo. Fortune Magazine places the sale among the “5 worst Internet acquisitions of all time.” If you type into your browser, you land on the Yahoo home page. That’s all that’s left: a domain name.

So, we know that Cuban is lucky, but why do I think that he’s a dummy? Well, one of the inside techie jokes on the Silicon Valley TV show is that the jackass character, Russ Hanneman, goes around saying that he got rich by “putting radio on the internet.” The show is clearly mocking Cuban, because that’s what he says. To this day, if an interviewer asks Cuban how he struck it rich, he will proudly reply: “I put radio on the internet.” It’s hilarious. Here are two Silicon Valley clips where Hanneman says “radio on the internet”:

So, not only is Cuban being mocked by Silicon Valley, but he seems to be completely oblivious to it, which is crazy since Cuban is in the TV business! How could he not know? Why wouldn’t he tell interviewers something else? At least change how he phrases it?

He’s just a dummy.

Silicon Valley also mocks Cuban for his “Three Commas” clothing line. A billionaire has three commas in his net worth: 1,000,000,000. So, here’s Cuban modelling his “I’m a billionaire” shirt:

And here’s Russ Hanneman with his “Tres Comas” tequila:

I was especially amused when Cuban challenged Trump to a four-hour interview. Cuban is the male version of Megyn Kelly: he thinks he is *in* the presidential campaign. If he wants to debate Trump so badly, why didn’t he just run himself? Too lazy, I reckon.

If you weren’t aware of the Russ Hanneman/Mark Cuban connection the first time through, it is worth re-watching Silicon Valley since Cuban will surely be trying to insert himself into the presidential campaign right up to Election Day, and even afterward if Trump wins.

And finally, Cuban is a flat-out poseur because he did not put radio on the internet. That was done by an actual techie by the name of Carl Malamud.

The Problem with Crooked Debates

The Democrats are pleased with themselves today for having succeeded in gaming the referee in last night’s debate. I would say that the HRC/Holt team defeated Donald Trump. However, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Trump’s poll numbers tick up anyway.

One thing that I remember from film class is that if you want to make your hero look more impressive, you put him up against multiple bad guys. So, the good guy shows up to the gunfight alone while the bad guy brings a couple of henchmen. The cowardly bad guy is afraid to face the brave good guy by himself and needs help.

Imagine if at the next debate, Trump faced Hillz plus 10 biased moderators. Who would be the underdog in that scenario? Who do you think the audience would root for? How many votes did Megyn Kelly’s attack deliver to Trump during the Republican debates? If there is an “anti news media” category of voter, I would bet that Trump is winning it.

Trump challenged Hillz to debate with no moderator, Lincoln & Douglas style. She declined. Is she a’feared? They also tried to add a second henchman, Mark Cuban, who would have ostensibly glowered at Trump from the first row in the audience. This all stinks of desperation, probably indicating unpleasant internal polling.


You Can’t Stand on a Box

If people see Hillz standing on a box at tonight’s debate, she loses. The box is ready to roll, but Hillz should kick it aside:

If she walks out, shakes hands with Trump, and then climbs up on her box, the debate will be over. You just can’t stand on a box. Didn’t Hillz see the “heightening” episode of Seinfeld?

A Second Industrial Revolution

Donald Trump is sounding more like he wants to smash NAFTA, as I recommend, instead of renegotiating it. So, what if a President Trump really did throw up a protective tariff sufficient to cause companies to bring their plants back to the USA? How many are we talking about? To think about this question, I have invented a new term:

The Exo-Economy
The exo-economy is that portion of the US industrial base which is located outside of our borders. You have probably seen estimates of 40,000-60,000 factories that have moved overseas. We can only guess because our government does not keep any official statistics. Nevertheless, if we used an estimate of 50,000 that would be 1,000 new factories for each state in the union.

If all of those factories came home, that would indeed constitute a revolution.

But that is only half of it. The free-trade era is decades old, and during that time, factories have been built in nations like Mexico, China, and Taiwan that were never in the USA to begin with. If you watch Shark Tank, then you know that it is pretty much impossible for an entrepreneur to get funding if they don’t have a “China strategy.” So, the vast bulk of new American manufacturing capacity has been sited overseas for many years now.

How many of these virgin exo-factories are there around the world? God only knows, however we can get an idea by looking at the size and growth of nations and companies whose economies have been constructed to export to the USA. I would like to see a professional economist study this issue and come up with an estimate. Personally, I think that a very large chunk of the emerging-markets “miracle” is comprised of plants that export nearly all of their output to the USA. Think Foxconn; their giant factories that produce phones and tablets for the USA were never here to begin with. A protective tariff would cause that production to relocate to the USA.

Nobody knows how big the exo-economy is, but there is no question that it is huge. We might have to double our estimate of incoming plants from 1,000 per state to 2,000. Of course, if we put up tariffs, other countries would retaliate with tariffs of their own and our exporters would lose business. However, I think the net effect would be enough new jobs to get all of our 43 million citizens on food stamps back to work.

This will be a project of Earth-shaking proportions. Consequently, we need to put a lot of thought into it. We need…

A Globalization End-of-Life Plan
Trump talks about a 35% tariff on Mexico, but that only makes sense if you want to single-out and punish Mexico. Such a tariff wouldn’t cause companies to come back to the USA; it would only cause them to go to Bangladesh, Vietnam, or Singapore. So, any protective tariff would need to be across the board; not designed to punish any one nation, but rather to rebuild the smoking-crater that we call the USA.

In order to give companies time to adjust, it might be a good idea to raise the tariff 10% per year with the first hike as soon as possible. While 10% might not prevent Ford from moving its small-car production to Mexico, it would let them know that the 35% was coming for sure.

Another approach would be to go industry-by-industry. Since the tidal-wave of demand for domestically-produced products would be so huge, we have to make sure that our existing industry could ramp-up swiftly. For example, if we put a tariff on shoes, how long would it be before domestic manufacturers could scale up? Years? Decades? That would be a terrible hardship on female citizens.

Of course, just because we put up a tariff doesn’t mean that products would stop coming in immediately. They would still come, if needed, but cost a little more. In most cases. In other cases, angry countries might just cut us off completely, and that could indeed be debilitating. Remember the dust-up we had with China a few years ago over rare-earth minerals? If Asian nations cut us off from technology, it might be a long time before you could get a new cell phone or laptop. And Mexico could turn the lights off in San Diego:

Mexican windmills export energy to San Diego.

Mexican windmills export energy to San Diego (story here).

Pollution Privilege
There are many more aspects that need to be studied beyond economics. After all, if Trump brought factories back to Detroit, and made it look like Ho Chi Minh City, would he be lauded or reviled?

Ho Chi Min City.

Trump wants to remove “un-needed” regulations on business, but I don’t think Americans will stand for going back to a toxic environment. We know for a fact that companies can manufacture products safely, cleanly, and profitably, so why tolerate anything less?

One of the big “free trade” perks for companies is what we might call the Pollution Privilege. So, not only do you make money on cheap labor, but you make additional profits by not having to worry about poisoning the peasants. This, of course, is a barbaric practice and should not be brought back here.

Tim Cook says that Americans are too stupid to make things. Of course, if you send all the factories away, as companies like Apple have done, and then criticize the former workers for having rusty skills, may I suggest the possibility that you are a jackass? Of course the USA is blanketed with rusty-skilled workers. Republicans like Donald Trump tend to think of retraining as a form of welfare. But this should be one of the very first things that Trump does. Even low-tech production like sewing clothes requires a high level of skill. Putting a Nike factory in the hood, or the trailer park, will be like a UFO landing. The factories have been gone for so long that an entire generation has no idea what goes on there. I’ll bet there are lots of old-timers in Detroit who know how to build a carburetor, but even they would need to be retrained on fuel-injectors. We will need thousands of vocational academies, and no, people on food-stamps can’t afford to pay for retraining.

Military Alliances
How many countries tolerate a U.S. military presence only because we allow them a free hand to export to our domestic market? Probably quite a few, so we need to plan for the loss of such “allies.”

When imports undermine a domestic monopoly, that’s a good thing. But why don’t we just break up the monopolies ourselves? If we go back to making things ourselves, this is going to become a bigger issue. If Trump wants a legacy of creating jobs for the people, he would tarnish it by allowing monopolies to gouge people at the cash register.

In places like Mexico, union organizers are shot in the head and buried in shallow graves. That’s pretty much a requirement for becoming a U.S. trade partner. Trump is an anti-union guy, and started out preaching against the minimum wage. Recently, when speaking to crowds in Oho and Pennsylvania, two pro-union states, Trump told them (paraphrasing): “I will bring the factories back from Mexico, but I can’t promise that they will come here. They might go to other states.” So, he was urging Ohio and Pennsylvania to become “Right to Work” states, which really means “Get Rid of Unions” states. Is that a good strategy for winning the votes of mostly-Democratic union members? Maybe; maybe not. But he seems willing to bet the election on it.

The Gaping Hole in the U.S. Constitution
Re-Industrializing with lax environmental regulations, low pay, and harsh working conditions hardly seems worth the effort. Going back to the age-old struggle between unions and robber-barons is not inspiring. So, why don’t we try for something better? The word “capitalism” does not appear anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. Back then, we were an agrarian nation, not to mention a barbaric slave state. So, it is not surprising that the founding fathers had nothing to say on the subject of labor relations.

If we are going to embark upon a second revolution, why not see if we can’t achieve a grand bargain of labor relations and incorporate it as a constitutional amendment? At first glance, this sounds like tilting at windmills; an impossible task. But in reality, it might be very easy. After all, the Germans have already solved it. It wouldn’t take long to copy their Betriebsrat system. When it comes to industrial success, you can’t do much better than the German approach.

Not Just an Industrial Revolution
Not only will the Second Industrial Revolution be physically huge, it will also constitute a huge political revolution. If you are thinking: “We are the USA; we are a large, powerful sovereign nation, and we can adjust our trade policies as we see fit” then you just haven’t been paying attention. The policies that we have now were written by corporate lobbyists, and rubber-stamped by a bought-and-paid-for Congress & White House.

So, while the multi-national corporations that run this country, and the world, like to keep a low profile, that doesn’t mean that they are not there, and it doesn’t mean that they won’t fight back. Consequently, this isn’t just a second industrial revolution, but a second War of Independence.

The probability is very high that Trump will be Farage’d – or worse.

In other words, don’t be surprised if things turn ugly. Establishing sovereignty the first time wasn’t easy. It’s not likely to be easy the second time either.

Open Borders = Open Sewer

Ahhh…another day in globalist paradise: ISIS stabbing people at the mall, Al-Qaeda blowing up people on the street, and yet another city (Charlotte) burning. Isn’t it great that Hillary Clinton and her “steady hand” will continue Obama’s fabulous legacy?

When you open the borders, the jobs go out and the jihadis come in.

We know this.

We have done the experiment.

Our borders have been open to mass-immigration and “free trade” for over two decades now. During that time, we have added 20 million people to the food-stamp rolls.

It didn’t work.

It’s not speculation or opinion.

It is a failed experiment.

HRC’s “steady hand” is really the “dead hand” of globalization.

Americans want to go back to the gated-community model while HRC just promises more sewage.

Good luck with that Democrats.

Jobs or Jihadis? Trump has the Better Vision

Donald Trump’s popularity has surged among African-Americans recently (see the L.A. Times tracking poll). I think this is because his vision of the future is far superior to that of Hillz. Trump wants to bring the factories home and see to it that some of them go into black neighborhoods. Meanwhile, Bill Clinton wants to repopulate Detroit with Syrian refugees – possibly the dumbest political strategy in the history of American politics.

Advantage: Trump.

But can Hillz change her vision to something better? No, she cannot. She can’t promise to bring jobs to the hood because she, and Obama, are hardcore globalists. They are committed to letting the jobs go to wherever the “invisible hand” thinks best. And that means Bangladesh, not Baltimore.

The hard truth is that Hillz is the torch-bearer of a dying ideology: globalism. Her vision for Urban America is: “sorry, you’re S.O.L. The invisible hand has spoken.”

Consequently, Hillz has decided to decline battle on the jobs front, and instead concentrate on portraying Trump as a racist in order to keep the black vote in the fold. Will it work? Will black people give up the vision of a more prosperous future in exchange for the fleeting satisfaction of dispatching a “racist” candidate? I don’t know, but this is likely what will determine the election.

Trump is not Pat Buchanan

Politico has a story about how Donald Trump is just a Pat Buchanan re-run. But this is simply not the case. Buchanan is a conservative, and Americans hate conservatives. Why else would guys like Mitt Romney and Ted Cruz have to “self-deport” from the Trump revolution? Buchanan would round up gay people, and have them break rocks in prison camps for the rest of their lives. He couldn’t be more out of touch if he tried.

The Moral Failure of Conservatism

No, this is not a conservative revolution. In fact, you could say that this is a revolution against conservatism. After all, it was guys like Mitt Romney and his Bain Capital that literally, physically moved US factories to China. After kicking American workers to the curb, he berated them for being lazy freeloaders and tried to cut off their “entitlements” – a.k.a. food stamps. That is the very definition of evil incarnate.

The truth is that conservatives and Republican administrations did just as much to “globalize” the USA as the Democrats. The only difference is that the Republicans were shouting at the victims to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.

Nobody is voting for that.

This *Might* Be an Anti-Globalization Revolution

But I am not convinced. After all, if Trump were assassinated, who would be his ideological heir? I can’t think of anybody. Jeff Sessions maybe, but he is the same age as Trump. Not exactly a young firebrand; speaking of which, where are the young firebrands? There aren’t any. So, what is fueling Trump’s popularity?

As I argued in my book, it takes a very long time to carpetbag a nation the size of the USA. And it has been proceeding smoothly for decades with hardly a peep from the people. It has even become a corporate “best practice” to the point where consumer brands like Disney, Ford, and Fossil don’t fear any blowback when they replace their citizen employees with foreigners, and announce more plants bound for Mexico. They are 100% brazen with zero fear of the people.

Nevertheless, the victims of globalization, what we might call the ex-middle-class, have now grown to a size where they can no longer be ignored by presidential candidates. Obama was the last presidential candidate to get away with a “bitter clinger” type of insult.

But while the ex-middle-class is now a huge political force, it is hardly revolutionary. When Ford announced that it would send all of its small-car production to Mexico, did angry citizens storm Ford headquarters? Hell no. When millions of foreign workers are flown into the USA every year, does anybody show up at an airport to protest, let alone turn them back? Hell no.

Americans are still docilely accepting globalization.

So, how is Trump doing so well? I think the linchpin of the whole thing is the jihadi issue. The Brits didn’t bolt from the EU until George Soros and Angela Merkel flooded the continent with jihadis.

Now, Obama is increasing the number of refugees, and Bill Clinton is fixing to march on Detroit at the head of an Islamic army.

This is not a recipe for victory.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that the only way the Democrats can win this election is to flip-flop on the jihadi issue. Obama might even need to claw back some of the refugees he already has brought in. In other words, the Dems are doomed.

Speaking of “widows and orphans” take a look at these refugees in Greece. In case you can’t make it out, they are chanting “Jihad! Jihad! Jihad!”

Trust me; Americans are not voting to bring that here. Not in a million years.

UPDATE: Only a few hours after publishing this, my thesis was vindicated by a Michigan poll showing Trump surging as voters in the state oppose taking more refugees. See the Detroit Free Press story here.

Bill Clinton’s Vision for Detroit

Copy and propagate!


Bill Clinton has a fabulous idea: he wants to re-populate Detroit with Syrian refugees. My guess is that the current African-American residents of the city probably aren’t terribly enthused by the notion.

This screenshot is from The Cleveland Show, episode 8 of season 3 titled “Y Tu Junior Tambien” at the 13:20 mark of the commercial-free video. In the scene, the black child, Rallo Tubbs, introduces himself to a group of Latino children:

“Hey! How ya doin’! Rallo Tubs. Great to meet you. Just want you to know I’m cool with you. So, remember this face when you’re outnumbering the rest of us in a few years. Rallo Tubs, who is cool…with…you; yeah, don’t hurt me.”

The scene is a commentary on how Third World immigrants have flooded into black communities. This is an issue that we rarely hear about. For example, you might think that Compton is a black city; but while Compton was once an enclave for the black middle-class, it is now 65% Latino; primarily Mexican.

And there is plenty of conflict. For example, here is a quote from a recent article in the Los Angeles Sentinel:

“Mainly because of the huge increase of Latino immigrants in Los Angeles, many Blacks feel discriminated against and displaced by Latinos, especially in employment.”

And Bill Clinton wants to march on Detroit at the head of an Arab Army? A sort of Million Muslim March on Detroit? Now? During an election? Has he lost his mind? Maybe, maybe not. After all, if George Soros were paying him $5,000 a head for every Syrian that he settled in Detroit, then Clinton would just be doing his job as a Soros sales rep working on commission.

So, I have recast the Latino children in the cartoon into jihadi children. If this meme goes viral, it could put an end to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which of course is highly dependent upon the black vote.

If you have a better idea, here is the original frame:


P.S. Rosie Perez is hilarious voicing the Choni character on the show.

Should Trump Catch Hillary?

I mean literally – at the debate. Imagine Hillary having a coughing fit, and then flopping over. Trump will be the closest person to her. Should he leap to her aid, or let her collapse to the ground?

Perhaps you think that I am being frivolous. But this just might be the most important thing that happens during the debate. Hillary looks and sounds terrible. The Democrats could have done better by coronating the re-animated corpse of Ted Kennedy.

Personally, I think Trump should catch Hillary; that will score chivalry points with the female voters currently hating on him.

If Trump is not quick enough though, Hillary could hit her head on the floor and actually die. So, they should put some pillows down there. Or perhaps she could have two burly hospital orderlies standing behind her, poised to catch her. Another choice would be strings; you know, like a puppet. So, Huma can work the strings as she whispers into Hillary’s ear piece. It might even make for a more convincing performance.

Hillary’s best strategy is to claim that she has been poisoned by Vladimir Putin, and bow out of the debates. Then she should go into an incubator, like a fragile baby bird, and stay there until one week before Election Day. Then she might have enough energy built up to campaign for that last week.

I got it! Put her in a wheelchair like FDR! It won’t fix the coughing, but the great thing about a wheelchair is that you can’t fall down.

You Democrats need to do something or face the prospect of your candidate being taken off the debate stage on a stretcher. Hillz is not well; precautions must be taken.

From Tax-and-Spend to Bribe-and-Spend

Look at this Lear Corp. maquiladora in Ciudad Juárez, just across the border from El Paso (lower-right quadrant):

It is one of dozens that the company has in Mexico, employing thousands of workers. They make car-interior parts like seats and visors. When Lear pays their Mexican workers, there are zero FICA taxes withheld from their checks. Zero dollars go to Washington, D.C. It all goes to Mexico City. And what about the company’s profits? Where do those go? Ireland? The Cayman Islands? I don’t know, but what I do know is that if this plant were located a half-mile north in Texas, there would be more money available for our bureaucrats to tax-and-spend.

But for some reason, they are not clamoring for the return of the former US tax-base now residing in Mexico, China, India, etc. Even as the federal deficit and debt balloon, and the “non-defense discretionary” part of the budget shrinks to only 13%, nobody in Washington makes a peep. Curious, no?

I think that what we are seeing is a transition from FDR’s old-fashioned tax-and-spend model to a shiny, new bribe-and-spend model. In this new system, politicians get their discretionary budgets directly from billionaires. We have hard evidence that this is happening now that George Soros has been hacked. Can it be long before right-wing billionaires like Sheldon Adelson and the Koch Brothers are hacked too?

David Rockefeller designed his Washington Consensus as a massive wealth-transfer program from workers to billionaires. It worked. The world’s 2,473 billionaires now control $7.7 trillion of capital, which is equal to the GDP of Japan plus Germany. Thanks to “free trade,” tax flows that once went to Washington have been diverted into the coffers of multi-national corporations and billionaires who now use the cash to purchase government officials, and make policy. George Soros has flooded Europe and the USA with thousands of jihadis. Sheldon Adelson wants to fire a nuclear warning shot at Iran. Both left-wing and right-wing billionaires are literally insane.

That’s why we got rid of kings in the first place.

Bogus Mexican Trade Stats

During his meeting with Donald Trump, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto said:

“Our country buys more from the U.S. than Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Japan, and the U.K. together.”

While that is a true statistic, it is not an apples-to-apples comparison. The idea that trade with Mexico is a fabulous source of wealth for the USA is completely ridiculous.

Imagine a scenario of what actually happens: a million dollars worth of auto parts are “exported” from the USA to Mexico. The parts are assembled into a car, and then a million dollars worth of cars are “exported” from Mexico to the USA. And $2 million in “wealth” has been created.

On paper.

In reality, the whole thing is a giant machine to help multinational corporations eliminate their American workforces. Just as David Rockefeller intended when he architected the system decades ago.

Our trade with Mexico bears no resemblance whatsoever to our trade with countries like Italy. It’s a completely different animal. A very large chunk of the 43 million people that we have on food stamps are NAFTA victims. Getting them back to work will never happen without us abrogating NAFTA (as well as other “trade” agreements).

Will Trump Usher in the North American Union?

Last week, I pointed out the new “hemisphere” talking-point unleashed by Donald Trump when he was in Mexico. Well guess what? Arch-conservative Ann Coulter is now repeating it. In a column on Breitbart, Coulter wrote:

“But he [Trump] also brought up the serious issues of illegal immigration, a border wall, drug cartels, NAFTA and keeping manufacturing in our hemisphere.”

Since when is “keeping manufacturing in our hemisphere” a “serious issue” – or an issue at all?

Since Trump started raising money, that’s when.


Will you, one day during the Trump administration, wake up to find that the USA has been dissolved into the North American Union (NAU)? And the dollars in your bank account converted into Ameros?

It’s starting to look that way.

Remember, without a Bretton-Woods type of system to manage exchange rates, perpetual currency-devaluations (to garner export-market share) will be the order of day. So, we should expect the Amero to be weaker than the dollar, and the North American Union to be one grand exercise in currency devaluation – just like the Germans did by converting the Deutsche Mark into the Euro.

A few months ago, Breitbart effused that the election was going to be a straight up-or-down vote on restoring US sovereignty. Well, it’s starting to look like no such thing. The Democrat is a globalist, and the Republican is now a hemispherist, which amounts to the same thing.

Trump is driven by self-aggrandizement. Getting him to sign-off on the NAU might be as simple as putting his face on the new currency.

I Know Something About Coughing

If I were an actor, and I had to play a part that required a chronic coughing fit, I could induce a Hillary-Clinton grade cough in myself at will. And I’m perfectly healthy. Some actors can cry on command; I can cough on command, albeit a few minutes after exposing myself to a certain thing.

I’ll never forget the day I made this discovery. I was exposed to the thing in the evening, and was up all night coughing. Non-stop; for hours. I thought that I was going to die. The cough was very similar to Clinton’s cough: dry and relentless. Next morning, I went on the Internet and started researching, and found the answer.

It might be useful for Clinton to know what this thing is. Unfortunately, I am not a fan. However, I’ve seen her hobnobbing with lots of rich people lately, raking in huge donations. So, perhaps the campaign would like to make a donation instead? Please direct your attention to the “Donate” button at the bottom of the sidebar on the right side of the screen. And it will need to be large – George Soros style (no rubber checks please). Ask yourself: how important will the ability-to-speak be during the debates with Trump? Kind of important, no?

For years, Howard Stern has been complaining about a stiff neck. If you know him, please direct him to my Miracle Stiff Neck Cure. It works – fast – and costs only pennies, which is why it will never be promoted by Big Pharma, which makes way more money by giving Stern muscle-relaxer injections. After the election, I will write a similar page about coughing.

Note: I grew up a few miles away from where Clinton had her coughing attack, and have breathed in plenty of Cleveland pollen. You might be surprised to learn that Cleveland has an enormous amount of greenery. When you fly in during the summer, it looks like you are landing in a forest. Hence, its nickname: The Forest City.

What About the Ex-Consumer?

Back in the day, the globalists tried to convince us that exporting factory jobs would eventually lead to more home-office jobs here as companies expanded overseas. That, of course, was a lie, and not even Larry Kudlow tells it anymore because today, everybody knows that exporting jobs has led to mass poverty, burning cities, and The White Plague.

But the globalists won’t quit; there is just too much money to be made from carpetbagging the USA. So, what argument do they use now? Let’s take a look at what right-wing, globalist, National-Review contributor Tom Rogan had to say on the last episode of The McLaughlin Group (transcript here):

“…my support for free trade comes down on the notion that I genuinely believe…that free trade saves American families thousands of dollars a year because it allows, for example, a t-shirt to be made abroad at lower cost than it would be made here. So, that saves families money.”

This is the “Globalization is Good for Consumers” talking point. Interestingly, this exact same argument could be used to justify slavery. T-shirts are made of cotton, so if we could enslave the cotton-workers, we could reduce costs even more for consumers. How about it, Tom?

[Note to self: don’t give them any ideas!]

Globalists like to argue that the USA is a consumer economy, and that anything that raises consumer prices is automatically bad for the nation. And yes, if we discontinue the use of Asian slave children in the production of our sneakers and cell phones, their prices could be expected to rise.

But when we talk about consumers we should really say the remaining consumers because the victims of globalization are no longer full-fledged consumers. Suppose that the factory where you used to work was sent to Mexico, and instead of a paycheck, you now get $127 per month in food stamps. And you spend it on toothpaste and Ramen noodles at the Family Dollar. Are you really a consumer? No, you are now an ex-consumer.

In aggregate, retailers can turn a profit by serving the massive ex-consumer segment of the market. But what if that were the entire economy? Would you still call the USA a consumer economy? No, of course not.

Globalization (which includes mass-immigration) also puts downward pressure on wages for remaining workers. So, are the low prices at Walmart really a windfall from globalization? Or are they a necessity to keep the business of the down-sizing middle class?

So, when you hear a globalist making this argument, ask him about the ex-consumers. And ask him if it is better to have a job in a t-shirt factory, or be on food stamps with the ability to buy a cheap t-shirt from China. And don’t be surprised when he opts for the latter, because that’s what carpetbaggers do. They burn the land and boil the sea just to make a buck.

Read more on this subject in my first book. Search down the page for the “Seductions of Slavery” section.

Chemical Warfare Tomorrow in Miami Beach

Wish me luck!

Tomorrow morning, aircraft will be spraying my neighborhood with deadly Naled, which is a toxic chemical outlawed in the European Union. Our buildings are too tall for crop dusters, which need to fly low, so they are going to fly offshore and let the sea breeze blow the Naled over the city. They will start early so that there will be time for the Naled to dissipate, and children won’t have to walk through chemical clouds on the way to school.

The city is not happy with aerial spraying, but the state and the country are calling the shots. The ground attack on Zika has failed, and mosquito populations are rising, so we have to escalate.

We knew that Zika was coming, but of course no restrictions could be put on travel to the Third World or immigration. Our borders are open, and any losses from Zika are considered acceptable collateral damage. Just like the 94 children who were infected with deadly tuberculosis here back in 1999 by an unscreened immigrant woman (see what I wrote here).

Zika, drug-resistant TB, Ebola, jihadis, indentured servants (H-1B workers). Is there anything we wouldn’t welcome with open arms? Seriously, I can’t think of anything.

Hillz Heads for the Wood-Chipper

Moderator: “Mr. Trump, what is your position on NAFTA?”

Trump: “We should pull out of NAFTA, bring the factories home, and staff them with well-paid American citizens.”

Moderator: “Secretary Clinton, same question.”

Clinton: “Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough. Cough, cough, cough.”


Moderator: “Times up Secretary Clinton. Please stop coughing.”

Seriously, why does Hillary Clinton think that she can debate Donald Trump when she can’t even talk to friendly audiences without coughing her head off? Is she trying to end her political career as a laughing-stock?

Remember when Democrats were mocking the Republicans because of the large number of candidates in the primaries? And the carnival-like atmosphere of the debates? Well, who’s laughing now? That Darwinian process produced the most savage animal in the Republican party. Meanwhile, the Democrats coronated their candidate, cordially informing the nation that the super delegates had spoken. The most-capable Democratic politicians, like Elizabeth Warren, didn’t even bother to run because they knew that the fix was in. Now, it turns out that the anointed one CAN’T EVEN TALK! Can you imagine?

If I were Clinton’s handler, I would pull her out of the debates. Either that, or I would have her take a crash-course in sign language, declare that she is no longer able to speak because of some horrible disease. And then I would proclaim her to be the first mute presidential candidate in history. Imagine all the sympathy Hillz would garner by replying to Trump in sign-language. 🙂

Ladies and Gentlemen, I submit to you that this election may come to an end on September 26th in Hempstead, New York.

Trump’s Failed Negotiations with Mexico

Republicans are overjoyed about Trump’s “presidential” trip to Mexico. And while it may have looked presidential, the truth is that it was a failed negotiation. In Trump’s speech, he talked about “improving NAFTA” and keeping industry “in the hemisphere.”

What does that mean? I think Trump was offering Mexican President Nieto a deal where we crack down on plants moving to Asia, and see to it that they go to Mexico instead. And that policy would be pitched to the American people as hemispheric solidarity.

After the speech, the idiots on Fox News were carrying on about the hemispheric strategy as if it were the greatest thing since sliced bread. I thought: “Wow, these fools have the same thing on their teleprompters. The fix is in. Out with America First, and in with Hemisphere First.”

And what was Trump asking for in exchange? Nothing very substantive that I could see. I think he just wanted Nieto to go along with him on the wall; helping Trump make his most boisterous campaign issue come true; that the Mexicans would pay for it.

However, as Trump was flying back to the USA, Nieto tweeted that he would not pay for the wall. Smoke came out of Trump’s ears, and he railed against NAFTA in his speech in Phoenix that night.

Clearly, NAFTA was on the table.

The American people are fed up with legal mass-immigration, and the mass-exportation of their jobs. This is why Trump has a shot at winning. But deep down, he doesn’t believe in those issues any more than Hillary Clinton does.

Trump also talked about fixing NAFTA by getting pay-raises for both Mexican and American workers. This is what globalists always say about our trade deals: “Yes, the trade deal will do terrible harm to American workers, but we will fix it with a side-deal.” But of course the side-deals never materialize. Talk of side-deals is one of the tell-tale signs that you are dealing with a globalist.

So, while a Trump victory in November might be a victory for the idea of restoring American sovereignty, Trump supporters should not get their hopes up because that is likely all it will be.

Trump Should Visit India for Border-Wall Ideas

When it comes to border-walls to keep out illegal immigrants, nobody does it like India. Their border-wall with Bangladesh is the longest in the world, and patrolled by a huge force of trigger-happy commandos armed with everything from attack dogs to artillery.

Indian commandos patrol border with Bangladesh.

Indian commandos patrol border with Bangladesh.

For example, notice that the Indians use chain-link instead of a solid wall. Think about it: you can shoot through a fence, but a solid wall obstructs your view of the enemy. And chain-link can be electrified unlike concrete. Those are just a couple tips that Mr. Trump could pick up from a visit to the world’s most spiritual and enlightened nation.

I’m not sure why India wants to keep out all of those nice Muslim Bangladeshis. Ironically, India claims the right to flood the USA with as many IT workers as they want, but I’m sure that there is a good explanation for that contradictory position.

Click here for a list of the weaponry used by India’s Border Security Force. Click here for more BSF photos.

Trump is Soft on Immigration

You might think that I’m crazy for saying this in light of Trump’s hard-line speech on immigration last night. However, none of Trump’s ten points addressed the record level of legal immigration that the USA is currently experiencing. Nor was the term “H-1B” even mentioned in the speech.

Our massive food-stamp population of 43.5 million people is hard proof that our economy is not able to absorb the giant tidal wave of a million legal immigrants per year, plus a huge contingent of legal visa workers.

The truth is that our legal-immigration problem is a far more serious economic problem than illegal immigration. Not only do we need to reduce legal immigration, but we probably need at least a ten-year moratorium on all immigration to absorb all the people that we have already taken in.

And not one word from Trump? WTF?

If you think that you can rebuild the middle class without drastically reducing legal immigration, you are sadly mistaken.

Trump Can’t “Fix” NAFTA

Imagine a widget factory that was in St. Louis before NAFTA. And now it is in Reynosa, Mexico just across the border from McAllen, Texas. The factory used to employ Americans at $20 per hour. Now it employs Mexicans at $1.25 per hour.

How does Donald Trump negotiate a better deal? Is this not a binary situation? Either the factory is in the USA, or it is in Mexico. Either St. Louis makes the widgets, or St. Louis burns.

No, NAFTA cannot be fixed; it can only be smashed.

So, what if we do smash it? What if we put tariffs on manufactured goods such that it is no longer profitable to locate factories in Mexico? There will be a mass exodus of factories back to the USA, a mad scramble to staff them, and a lot of poor people will be able to live in apartments instead of refrigerator boxes. So, that would be a good thing for the USA.

But Mexico will retaliate. They will absolutely put tariffs on American agricultural exports. Flyover country senators will storm the Oval Office, and Trump’s Secret Service detail will have to beat them back with batons. Those are the guys that Trump will have to negotiate with. And that may not be easy, or even possible. Those senators might be able to block everything that Trump tries to get through Congress.

Agriculture is a much smaller employer than manufacturing. So, if you want to create a lot of jobs, trading agricultural exports for factories is the way to do it. Probably the only way that we will ever be able to substantially reduce the 43 million people that we have on food stamps.

We need to do something dramatic and earth-shaking; not send Carl Icahn to Mexico City to negotiate. This has nothing to do with the Mexicans or the Chinese or the Indians. They are just the lucky recipients of the vast program of carpetbagging set into motion by David Rockefeller long ago.

What we should do is announce to the world that we have screwed up: Don’t take it personally; it’s us, not you. We have dug ourselves a giant hole, our cities are burning, and the only way dowse the flames is to institute an across-the-board tariff on imports of goods and services. A protective tariff that will be high enough to bring back our factories from Mexico and China, our call centers from Eastern Europe, and our IT shops from India.

There are about 3,000 maquiladoras employing 1 million Mexicans along the border. What if we moved all those plants to Texas? That would totally eliminate poverty in the state, right? Wrong. Texas has 3.7 million people on food stamps. The size of our poverty problem (not to mention the corresponding national debt) is GARGANTUAN. Anybody who tells you that there is another way out is living in a dream world.

Note: Mexico and Canada have a lot of oil. However, if we abrogated NAFTA, I suspect that they would still want us as a customer.

Note: Not all of the plants went to the maquiladora belt along the border. There are many more further south. For example, here is a GM plant in Silao:

This is a live map, so you can click the “+” to zoom in, etc. If you own a Chevy Silverado, it may have been built in Silao.