Category Archives: Transhuman News

There are few things in politics as dangerous as a sure thing.

Maybe thats because when a political party believes victory is certain, the kooks and grifters come out in droves to profit off it generally eroding whatever advantage that party might have had to begin with in the process.

And so, with the possibility of a red wave in 2022 widely considered to be a sure thing, it really shouldnt have been surprising that some of Team Reds candidates are almost comically damaging to Republican prospects.

Given Nevadas unique position in national politics, its only fitting that many of the GOPs unforced errors would take place here especially because much of the Republican consulting class in this state appears to be more interested in the grift than they are in propelling credible and qualified candidates to victory.

A recent case in point would be Michele Fiores inexplicable decision to brag even campaign on the fact that a disgraced former councilman-turned-lobbyist, Ricki Barlow, endorsed her campaign for treasurer.

Certainly, most campaign consultants would jump at the chance to have an endorsement from someone in the opposing party a phenomenon some Democrats have enjoyed several times this election cycle. Nonetheless, most competent campaigns would also give at least a modicum of consideration to the reputation of the person giving the endorsement before bragging about it to potential voters.

The grifters who comprise certain factions within the Republican Party, however, apparently dont consider such nuanced considerations to be important. And so, the woman who has, herself, been investigated for shady financial practices is publicly promoting the endorsement of a disgraced colleague.

Fiores trademarked poor judgment, however, is not an isolated incident.

Sigal Chattah, the Republican running for attorney general, has demonstrated a similar level of incompetent politicking in her race. Her comments, demeanor and political views aside, her recent lawsuit to remove the (ineligible) Libertarian candidate from the ballot had the fingerprints of rank political amateurs all over it.

One can presume her attempt to boot the Libertarian candidate from the ballot stems from a belief that he would siphon votes from the Republican ticket on election day therefore further frustrating what is already turning out to be a challenging race for her. Since the Libertarian has already sought to withdraw his candidacy, it makes sense Chattah would seek to remove the spoiler-candidates name from the ballot.

However, her lawsuit was filed months later than it should have been if there was ever going to be any hope of removing his name and after the last legal day for name changes to be made to the ballot. Chattahs team effectively waited until ballots were ready to roll off the printers and get stuffed into envelopes leaving Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, the judicial branch, or even the lowly-paid employee responsible for hitting print on the big machine at the ballot factory, incapable of actually doing anything about it.

It should come as no surprise that Chattahs lawyer for this matter was Joey Gilbert the very same man who threw a litigious temper-tantrum after his entirely predictable primary loss to Republican Sheriff Joe Lombardo. If the last headline-grabbing lawsuit he was a part of was any indication of future performance, reasonable observers should have known this one wouldnt pan out well for team red.

And sure enough, a district court judge ruled last week that the ineligible Libertarian candidates name will, indeed, remain on the ballot.

Beyond these specific examples, theres also a growing (and ill-advised) belief among many Republican candidates that being actively hostile toward the news media is, somehow, a winning campaign strategy.

Adam Laxalt, for example, has effectively built a wall around his campaign to keep out reporters who might ask occasionally difficult questions. So far, Laxalt has even refused to agree to a debate with his Democratic opponent putting him out of step with other high-profile Republicans, such as Joe Lombardo, who have already agreed to the pretty standard practice of public debates in major political contests.

Of course, to be fair, Laxalts apparent inaccessibility isnt a uniquely Republican trait. For example, his opponent Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto has refused to grant The Nevada Independent the kind of long-form interview that Republicans Mark Amodei and Joe Lombardo have already provided.

But why would she? Why risk being asked a handful of difficult questions when Laxalt is willfully limiting his own ability to talk to voters through the media? In a very tangible way, Laxalts resistance to engaging with reporters has given Cortez Masto the freedom to be highly selective about when (or if) she decides to engage with objective news outlets and that freedom is a pretty welcomed gift to any incumbent trying to defend their office.

By many measures, 2022 should have been a very successful election year for the GOP with economic challenges, midterm trends and a deeply unpopular Democratic president setting the stage for a red wave in November. However, that advantage effectively gave rise to a goldrush of amateurs, opportunists, and grifters seeking to profit quickly off such a sure thing.

And those are exactly the types of people capable of turning a predicted red wave into something more like a ripple.

Michael Schaus is a communications and branding expert based in Las Vegas, Nevada, and founder of Schaus Creative LLC an agency dedicated to helping organizations, businesses and activists tell their story and motivate change. He has more than a decade of experience in public affairs commentary, having worked as a news director, columnist, political humorist, and most recently as the director of communications for a public policy think tank. Follow him at SchausCreative.com or on Twitter at @schausmichael.

Read more from the original source:
The 'red wave' was such a sure thing, of course Republicans are blowing it The Nevada Independent - The Nevada Independent

You may think Nevada Republican candidate for secretary of state Jim Marchant is just a despicable election denying conspiracy peddler who, given the opportunity, would eagerly reject the will of Nevadas citizens if more of them voted for a Democrat than a Republican.

And he is.

But hes also a businessman! Or was? Whatever.

Last week the Review-Journal reported that Marchants entrepreneurial enterprises had a habit of getting sued over the years, and losing, for breaching contracts and not paying bills. You can see why Donald Trump, Americas deadbeat-in-chief, would call Marchant a legendary businessman. Well, a Marchant campaign person told the Review-Journal thats what Trump said once.

Maybe Trump said that in 2020, when Marchant was losing an election for Congress. Trump endorsed him that year. Trump does not appear to have endorsed Marchant this year as yet.

Marchant has however been endorsed by Adam Laxalt. And Trump has endorsed Laxalt. So Marchant is only one degree removed from a Trump endorsement? Hmm, I seem to be digressing. Where was I?

Oh right. Deadbeat businessman. In fairness to Marchant, the qualifications required to run a business haphazardly and ineffectively or even right into the ground may be entirely different from the skill-set (hate, paranoia, hostility to facts, affection for QAnon, etc.) needed in any effort to deprive voters of their choice and steal an election from them. Apples and oranges. Maybe.

***

You may think Nevada Republican candidate for attorney general Sigal Chattah is just a rootin tootin MegaMAGAhead who coined this campaign cycles most distinctive if disturbing campaign slogan when she said the Black man who currently has the job should be hanging from a f***ing crane.

And she is.

But shes also a lawyer! Granted, shes a lawyer who, when asked a question about the legal status of abortion rights in Nevada, gave the wrong answer. But a lawyer nonetheless.

Which is an important point in this instance because the Legislature passed a law that says you cant be attorney general unless you are a member of the state bar.

And thats an important point in this instance because a Libertarian non-lawyer filed to run for AG, so Chattah got fellow rootin tootin MegaMAGAhead and Republican gubernatorial primary loser (though hes in denial, sniffle) Joey Gilbert to sue to get the Libertarian off the ballot. To which the office of Nevadas Republican secretary of state said yikes you should have asked earlier because its too late now, or words to that effect, and a judge agreed, the Nevada Independent reported Wednesday.

Before you start sending sympathy cards to Chattah, you should know the Libertarian non-lawyer says he wanted to be taken off the ballot and has no intention of campaigning because goshdarnit the laws the law. Which seems sort of a squishy position for a libertarian to take if people want to elect a non-lawyer AG they should have the liberty to do that, amirite? Darned burdensome freedom-crushing government regulations.

Come to think of it, how come instead of trying to get Big Government to uphold that law, Sigal, and Joey too for that matter, arent calling out its underlying un-Americanness? Why arent Sigal and Joey championing her fellow freedom-loving libertarians rights and Hmm, I seem to be digressing. Where was I?

Oh right, squishy Libertarian will probably be on the ballot whether he likes it or not.

Yes, Libertarian votes are votes that otherwise would go to the Republican. Conceptually. In practice, though, you may have noticed over the years that Libertarians rarely if ever perform as well as polling might suggest, or as Republicans might fear, or as Democrats might hope. It seems a gut check kicks in when its time for right-wing voters to cast their ballots, and they vote for the candidate they think has the best chance of winning, i.e., the Republican. Whether Chattah wins or loses wont hang, er, hinge on the performance of a third party candidate.

***

You may think Republican state treasurer candidate Michele Fiore is a scandal-ridden grifter and carnival loon barking at the moon and hoping for the moon and the loons to notice her.

And she is.

Some things never change.

Read more:
Jim, Sigal, and Michele just living their best lives - Nevada Current

Among the many explanations or interpretations of the roaring buzz that followed the death of the queen of England and the proclamation of the new king, I note three plausible ones, from the most comforting to the most concerningin a classical-liberal or libertarian perspective.

The first, optimistic, interpretation is that people (by which I mean most people) like a hands-off distant sovereign as opposed to an omnipresent harasser. They would rather see the photograph of a constitutional, i.e. limited, monarch in government offices than a meddling and divisive fifty-percent-plus-one president. The queen has arguably never done anything against one of her subjects, contrary to Trump or Biden. In a fertile imagination, the queen might evoke Anthony de Jasays capitalist state, which reigns but does not govern, that is, does not impose costs on some subjects for the benefit of others, and whose only role is to prevent the establishment of a state that would govern.

This overly optimistic view is attenuated by the fact that the queen did allow the decline of English liberty (although she could probably not have prevented it). As a symbolic representation, compare the 96 cannonballs that mourned her passing with the interdiction for any subject who is not in her majestys service to have a revolver in his nightstand drawer. Moreover, by any account, the start of the decline of English liberty preceded Elizabeth IIs reign anyway.

A second interpretation is that people simply like ceremonial rites, decorum, and tradition, which is very different from what they get under egalitarian and totalitarian democracy, a sausage factory of discriminatory laws that take sides for some subjects and against others, and change every few years under the cheers of a passing numerical majority and the shouts of an exploited minority. Passing through checkpoints is not a ride in a carriage drawn by white horses. A ceremonial king or queen makes the subjects feel above all that.

As de Jasay notes, however, a state that looks innocuous may just serve to disarm mistrust. In this perspective, the main benefit of the good queen may be a fairy tale for her subjects to dream about. They love royalty like they are fans of celebrities. The propaganda power of the state should not be ignored. Instead of a queen or a king, the French have the timeless Marianne, an attractive woman who represents the republic (see image below). How can that be dangerous?

The third and most pessimistic interpretation of the buzz around Elizabeth II and Charles III, is that people may long for a glamorous and powerful sovereign to obey. James Buchanan was caught wondering if individuals really want equal liberty as classical liberals have assumed for a few centuries. The British cry long live the King could be analogous to the proud Trump is my president or possibly Biden is my president of Americans.

The actual mix of these explanations across the different individuals may determine how far we are down the road to serfdom.

Here is the original post:
Long Live the King (My President)! - Econlib

Two advocacy pieces in recent months both suffered from the same problem: sweeping assertions based on theoretical models and false assumptions and beliefs.

Rent Control Will Harm the Poor was an exercise in advocacy-based science. It picked studies by Conservative Libertarians that predictably supported the assumptions and goals of real estate promoters. Rent Stabilization Is a Necessary Tool was also an exercise in advocacy-based science. It picked studies by Liberal Progressives that predictably supported the assumptions and goals of social justice promoters.

The arguments on both sides were made as if we are litigators in a court of law rather than a society of human beings trying to achieve group functional outcomes. What they are engaged in is not scientific inquiry; it is advocacy-based science that uses selective scientific information to promote a predetermined position.

Public policy should be based on knowledge, not theory.

I have been a property owner, businessman, and resident in Santa Barbara since 1980. My family and friends want multigenerational communities in Santa Barbara County where our children can buy homes; we dont want wealth ghettos surrounded by servant communities.

In the real world outside of economic theories, local property values float on top of the global stock of properties; housing is a financial asset, and financial assets are valued based on the willingness of investors to hold the stock of the asset. Housing is treated by the capital markets as a financial asset by virtue of the fact that it can be easily rented out and generally produces a positive yield. Assets that produce cash flow are always treated as financial assets by investors. By contrast, oil, wheat, and gold are commodities that cost money to store and have no meaningful rental demand; they do not produce a positive yield.

The reason shelter is unaffordable for a majority of the Santa Barbara population in 2022 is that too great a share of the total housing stock is held by the private market and too great a share of the funding is extended to low-risk consumers: consumers with high credit scores. Housing costs have been driven higher as global wealth has experienced massive growth since the 1980s, while investable opportunities offering attractive returns to global capital have simultaneously become rare in the developed world. This flood of wealth, or accumulated capital, has placed great downward pressure on the cost of capital, or real interest rates, which has drastically reduced yields on high quality bonds. This in turn has drastically increased investment demand for rental yield.

Supply and demand have not stopped working in housing markets; the confusion is about which demand is instrumental. Investment demand is instrumental in modern housing markets, not shelter demand. The confusion is compounded by failing to account for the massive size of global demand for rental yields, relative to the potential supply of private sector housing units. The demand for financial assets dwarfs any potential supply that the private sector will ever produce!

Since housing is effectively a financial asset, it is also illogical to expect that such policies as rental assistance in the form of tax breaks or vouchers and so on will do anything but drive up housing costs. All public subsidies of the private sector, such as rental assistance, school vouchers, and health-care subsidies, drive up the cost of the product or service in question. Why? Because the private market responds to such public funding guarantees by setting prices based on whatever private businesses can get away with in political terms not based on market value.

The fact that the unregulated private market is a destabilizing force in the economy should be obvious to rational people. Unfortunately, its equally obvious that we are generally not governed by rational people. We are governed by political ideologues. Complete markets require healthy competition between private and public sectors. Over the last 50 or so years we have experienced the weaponizing of economic theory for political purposes. And the effects of misguided privatization and deregulation that has followed has been disastrous for multigenerational communities; residential and socioeconomic segregation has exploded.

Unaffordable housing is entirely political due to the restrictions on the supply of funding for high-risk consumers. The federal government, as a sovereign currency issuer and treasurer of all future output of the nation, could achieve affordable housing for all Americans in a matter of a few years. It is the same with health care, childcare, and education. Sweden did this in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. Its very straightforward, but Conservatives and Libertarians have internalized an ideology that defines anything that exists outside of their narrow definition of markets as Socialism. They ignore the historical performance of the Swedish stock market, the fact that rates of innovation are higher in Sweden than in the U.S., and that thriving Swedish capitalism is a historical fact.

Instead of allowing incomplete markets and real estate speculation to destroy communities, communities should hold referendums on population limits and growth, set aside a certain percentage of every communitys housing stock for local residents, and lease that residential and commercial housing to local residents with proven seniority at an affordable percentage of the local median household income. Communities should also establish public trusts that offer financing to housing cooperatives owned by long-term residents.

Kristian Blom is a fixer at Blom Levy & Co., registered investment advisors.

Here is the original post:
How Housing Is Captive to Investment Demands - Santa Barbara Independent

Election Day is less than two months away, on Nov. 8. That's when voters will go to the polls and decide on the next governor of Arkansas.Republican candidate Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Democrat Chris Jones and Libertarian Ricky Dale Harrington Jr. are vying for the position. All three candidates spent the past week on the campaign trail. Harrington Jr. hopes his campaign puts the Libertarian Party on the map with people in Arkansas.We have made great progress in our country because of those ideas and principles of liberties, he said. We have freedoms as African Americans in this country now. Freedoms that my grandparents didn't have. Freedoms that my parents didn't have, as a black man right now, and we're still working towards those principles of liberty.Jones is continuing his walk a mile campaign. He told 40/29 News this past week that he wants to hear from Arkansas on issues that matter to them, like education.Jones spent Friday in Russellville. He said the energy has been high on his campaign stops."When we're thinking about the position of governor, it's an executive position, and so you need executive experience, he said. And Ive run multiple multi-million-dollar organizations. It's a problem-solving experience. We have problems to solve, and Im an engineer and a scientist. I know how to solve problems. Most importantly, it's a moment where we need a leader who has the compassion to bring us together as a community."Sanders greeted hundreds of voters in Bella Vista Friday morning as part of her freedom tour. She focused on improving education and making sure young Arkansans are set up for success."We pushed this idea for so long that if a kid didn't go to a four-year university, that they couldn't be successful, she said. Frankly, nothing could be further from the truth. We need to put kids on a pathway to prosperity, and make sure they're prepared either when they graduate from high school to go directly into the workforce. Or whether they're going into a two-year program, an apprenticeship program, or a four-year degree."

Election Day is less than two months away, on Nov. 8. That's when voters will go to the polls and decide on the next governor of Arkansas.

Republican candidate Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Democrat Chris Jones and Libertarian Ricky Dale Harrington Jr. are vying for the position.

All three candidates spent the past week on the campaign trail.

Harrington Jr. hopes his campaign puts the Libertarian Party on the map with people in Arkansas.

We have made great progress in our country because of those ideas and principles of liberties, he said. We have freedoms as African Americans in this country now. Freedoms that my grandparents didn't have. Freedoms that my parents didn't have, as a black man right now, and we're still working towards those principles of liberty.

Jones is continuing his walk a mile campaign. He told 40/29 News this past week that he wants to hear from Arkansas on issues that matter to them, like education.

Jones spent Friday in Russellville. He said the energy has been high on his campaign stops.

"When we're thinking about the position of governor, it's an executive position, and so you need executive experience, he said. And Ive run multiple multi-million-dollar organizations. It's a problem-solving experience. We have problems to solve, and Im an engineer and a scientist. I know how to solve problems. Most importantly, it's a moment where we need a leader who has the compassion to bring us together as a community."

Sanders greeted hundreds of voters in Bella Vista Friday morning as part of her freedom tour.

She focused on improving education and making sure young Arkansans are set up for success.

"We pushed this idea for so long that if a kid didn't go to a four-year university, that they couldn't be successful, she said. Frankly, nothing could be further from the truth. We need to put kids on a pathway to prosperity, and make sure they're prepared either when they graduate from high school to go directly into the workforce. Or whether they're going into a two-year program, an apprenticeship program, or a four-year degree."

More here:
Arkansas governor candidates hitting the campaign trail - 4029tv

GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN - NOVEMBER 28: Aaron Rodgers #12 of the Green Bay Packers reacts after defeating the Los Angeles Rams 36-28 at Lambeau Field on November 28, 2021 in Green Bay, Wisconsin. (Photo by Patrick McDermott/Getty Images)

Aaron Rodgers hasn't shied away from the microphone leading up to the 2022 NFL season.

The Green Bay Packers starting quarterback has done a lot of notable interviews, many of which focused on things other than football, and his latest one is making some headlines.

Rodgers voiced his opinion on the abortion issue in a reported interview with Bill Maher.

"I don't believe the government should have any control over what we do with our bodies."

Unsurprisingly, Rodgers' comments are making waves on social media this weekend.

"Agreed," one fan wrote.

"Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck..." another fan wrote.

"Why is this even a controversial statement?" one fan added.

"More proof that Rodgers is a Libertarian. Remember, you can have an opinion on something and still believe its wrong for the government to force that belief on other people," one fan added.

Do you side with Rodgers?

Read more:
Aaron Rodgers Sounds Off On Government: NFL World Reacts - The Spun