THIS IS NOT SUSTAINABLE by RICH LOWERY

.

.

ECONOMY & BUSINESS

This Is Not Sustainable

By RICH LOWRY. March 24, 2020 6:30 AM


.

Countries have experienced economic depressions before, but not usually as a matter of choice.

The nationwide coronavirus shutdowns over the past two weeks have ground parts of the country to a halt. We have probably never before in our history seen so much economic activity vaporize so quickly — within days or even hours. The Great Depression and the panics of the 19th century are the only possible analogues.

Goldman Sachs is forecasting a 24 percent drop in quarterly GDP. Morgan Stanley is anticipating a 30 percent decline.

These are the top-line numbers of a vastation that will throw millions out of work, stress families and blight personal lives, destroy the dreams of small-business owners, and bankrupt industries. This is a tale of human misery, not just of declines in the stock market and in GDP.

The federal government can alleviate some of the damage, but even the biggest, best-designed stimulus bill is no substitute for shuttered storefronts and factories. And how many times can Washington pass $2 trillion bills? No, this is not sustainable, nor will people stand for it except as a temporary expedient. President Donald Trump is already expressing impatience with his own guidance against gatherings of more than 10 people for the next 15 days.

If that sentiment is understandable, it’d be foolish to give up on the lockdowns before they have much of a chance to, in the cliché of the hour, flatten the curve.

And it’s important to remember that the disease itself is imposing an economic cost. It would have caused a recession regardless of government policy. Would New York City restaurants really be full if it weren’t for the Andrew Cuomo–ordered lockdown? Would people be eager to get on airplanes? To book a cruise? To see a Broadway show? To go to Disneyland?

If the disease had been left unchecked, it would have exacted an enormous price, in lives of the infected, in the breakdown of the hospital system, in the follow-on effects on people ill with conditions that would have gone untreated. No matter how bad today’s lockdowns are, imagine if we decided to undertake them at a time when the U.S. already had a million cases and the health-care system was in deep crisis.The answer to our current situation doesn’t require downplaying COVID-19, or going about business as usual and hoping for the best. The advantage of the lockdowns is that they make every other public-policy option look cautious and inexpensive by comparison. What can be more radical than telling tens of millions of Americans to shelter in place?

Our aim should be to shift from the blunderbuss solution of mass shutdowns to rifle-shot remedies, on the model of what South Korea has done with its widespread testing (although it has much more favorable conditions as a smaller, more cohesive country with an outbreak centered on one church).

We should focus on the production of tests, ventilators, masks, and other protective gear on an industrial scale. Whatever the government has to spend or do to get it done should happen — just as if we were on a wartime footing.

The first priority should obviously be backstopping the hospital system and protecting front-line medical workers. But, as economists Paul Romer and Alan M. Garber argue, we need to widen out from there to create a system of population-wide testing and the distribution of protective gear to workers interacting with the public to protect against the spread, while allowing for ordinary work.

This regimen would depend on innovation — cheaper, faster tests, etc. — but that is surely within our power with enough will and resources.

Then, we could begin to return to normal with much less risk, even if vulnerable populations and metropolitan hot spots still require extraordinary precautions.

Whatever path we take will be costly and have its downsides. All we can know with certainty is that the current path is untenable.

SUPPOSE THEY SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT AND NOBODY CARED

Well, the anti-American Democratic Party with a handful of equally moronic Republicans have shut down the government in favor of DACA, the so-called Dreamers who are here illegally. The 44th President who was not a fan of the United States Constitution, did not like the messiness of passing actual laws. He enjoyed using his pen to sign executive orders. As part of a budget deal the Dumocrats insist on language that will finally legalize DACA (Deferred Acton for Childhood Arrivals). This is completely orchestrated, the Dumocrats just wanted to make the President and the Republican Congress look bad. Will it work? It might. The Dumocrats own the media. Surely the media is painting this government shutdown as some kind of disaster. It is not good that while the government shutdown is in effect, the military are not being paid. That is very bad and very evil. Why do the Congressmen and Senators get paid during this period? Aren't they non-essential? In fact, I can barely think of any group of people more non-essential than these clowns. The truth is, most Americans probably don't even know that we are currently in 'shutdown' mode and many more who do know, like me, probably don't care too much. I know that this shutdown is very thrilling to the anti-trumpers at ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC and The New York Times, but they may be miscalculating just how much real people, actual voters, real Americans care about this. I should amend my comments. I do care. And I place the blame squarely on the un-American, un-patriotic, US Constitution-hating Democrats that infest the Congress. There is a lot more swamp draining that needs to be done.

Your Food Diary For:

Saturday, January 20, 2018

BREAKFAST	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
Hy-vee - Oatmeal - Apples & Cinnamon	660	138	9	18	750	36
	660	138	9	18	750	36
L U N C H
Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich	700	55	31	17	286	31
	700	55	31	17	286	31
D I N N E R
Taco Bell, taco dinnerl	1,000	75	50	50	0	10
	1,000	75	50	50	0	10
S N A C K S
Met Rx -Chocolate Cookie Dough	400	58	6	31	167	28
	400	58	6	31	167	28
Totals	2,760	326	96	116	1,203	105
Your Daily Goal	3,324	415	110	167	2,300	124
Remaining	564	89	14	51	1,097	19
	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
	*You've earned 1,394 extra calories from exercise today

.

PRESIDENT NOBAMA

Victor Davis Hanson in his National Review column published on January 16th perfectly describes the amazingly terrific job that President Trump is doing.  I don't know if I agree with every word, but it's close. 

.

President Nobama

by VICTOR DAVIS HANSON January 16, 2018 4:00 AM @VDHANSON 

Trump is commonsensically undoing, piece by piece, the main components of Obama’s legacy. Donald Trump continues to baffle. Never Trump Republicans still struggle to square the circle of quietly agreeing so far with most of his policies, as they loudly insist that his record is already nullified by its supposedly odious author. Or surely it soon will be discredited by the next Trumpian outrage. Or his successes belong to congressional and Cabinet members, while his failures are all his own. Rarely do they seriously reflect on what otherwise over the last year might have been the trajectory of a Clinton administration. Contrary to popular supposition, the Left loathes Trump not just for what he has done. (It is often too consumed with fury to calibrate carefully the particulars of the Trump agenda.) Rather, it despises him mostly for what he superficially represents.

To many progressives and indeed elites of all persuasions, Trump is also the Prince of Anti-culture: mindlessly naïve American boosterism; conspicuous, 1950s-style unapologetic consumption; repetitive and limited vocabulary; fast-food culinary tastes; Queens accent; herky-jerky mannerisms; ostentatious dress; bulging appearance; poorly disguised facial expressions; embracing rather than sneering at middle-class appetites; a lack of subtlety, nuance, and ambiguity. In short Trump’s very essence wars with everything that long ago was proven to be noble, just, and correct by Vanity Fair, NPR, The New Yorker, Google, the Upper West Side, and The Daily Show. There is not even a smidgeon of a concession that some of Trump’s policies might offer tens of thousands of forgotten inner-city youth good jobs or revitalize a dead and written-off town in the Midwest, or make the petroleum of the war-torn Persian Gulf strategically irrelevant to an oil-rich United States. Yet one way of understanding Trump — particularly the momentum of his first year — is through recollection of the last eight years of the Obama administration. In reductionist terms, Trump is the un-Obama. Surprisingly, that is saying quite a lot more than simple reductive negativism. Republicans have not seriously attempted to roll back the administrative state since Reagan. On key issues of climate change, entitlements, illegal immigration, government spending, and globalization, it was sometimes hard to distinguish a Bush initiative from a Clinton policy or a McCain bill from a Biden proposal. There was often a reluctant acceptance of the seemingly inevitable march to the European-style socialist administrative state. Of course, there were sometimes differences between the two parties, such as the George W. Bush’s tax cuts or the Republicans’ opposition to Obamacare. Yet for the most part, since 1989, we’ve had lots of rhetoric but otherwise no serious effort to prune back the autonomous bureaucracy that grew ever larger. Few Republicans in the executive branch sought to reduce government employment, deregulate, sanction radical expansion of fossil-fuel production, question the economic effects of globalization on Americans between the coasts, address deindustrialization, recalibrate the tax code, rein in the EPA, secure the border, reduce illegal immigration, or question transnational organizations. To do all that would require a president to be largely hated by the Left, demonized by the media, and caricatured in popular culture — and few were willing to endure the commensurate ostracism.

Trump has done all that in a manner perhaps more Reaganesque than Reagan himself. In part, he has been able to make such moves because of the Republican majority (though thin) in Congress and also Even his critics sometimes concede that his economic and foreign-policy agendas are bringing dividends. In some sense, it is not so much because of innovative policy, but rather that he is simply bullying his way back to basics we’ve forgotten over the past decades. The wonder was never how to grow the economy at 3 percent (all presidents prior to 2009 had at one time or another done just that), but rather, contrary to “expert” economic opinion, how to discover ways to prevent that organic occurrence. Obama was the first modern president who apparently figured out how. It took the efforts of a 24/7 redistributionist agenda of tax increases, federalizing health care, massive new debt, layers of more regulation, zero-interest rates, neo-socialist regulatory appointments, expansionary eligibility for entitlements, and constant anti-free-market jawboning that created a psychological atmosphere conducive to real retrenchment, mental holding patterns, and legitimate fears over discernable success. Obama weaponized federal agencies including the IRS, DOJ, and EPA in such a manner as to worry anyone successful, prominent, and conservative enough to come under the federal radar of a vindictive Lois Lerner, Eric Holder, or a FISA court. Trump has sought to undo all that, point by point. The initial result so far is not rocket science, but rather a natural expression of what happens when millions of Americans believe they have greater freedom and safety to profit and innovate, and trust they will not be punished, materially or psychologically, for the ensuing successful results. The radical upsurge in business and consumer confidence is not revolutionary but almost natural. The Left and Never Trump Right claim that Trump is Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini. In fact, for the first time in eight years, it is highly unlikely that the FBI, IRS, CIA, DOJ, and other alphabet-soup agencies see their tasks as going after the president’s perceived opponents. The same about-face is true on the foreign-policy front, as the ancient practice of deterrence replaced the modern therapeutic mindset. Obama blurred, deliberately so, the lines between allies and hostiles. America experienced the worst of both worlds: We were rarely respected by our friends, even more rarely feared by our enemies; loud rhetorical muscularity was backed up only by “strategic patience” and “leading from behind.” On the supposedly friendly side, Europe assumed that the United States would fawn after the virtue-signaling Paris Climate Accord. The Palestinians concluded that there was no shelf life on victimhood and that America simply would not, could not, dare not move its embassy to Jerusalem as the Congress had chronically showboated it would. NATO just knew that endless subsidies were its birthright and prior commitments were debatable. The West apparently lapped up Obama’s Cairo speech: But when even the European Renaissance and Enlightenment were seen as derivatives of Islam, there is not much left to boast about. On the unfriendly side, China sensed there was little danger in turning the Spratley Islands into an armed valve of the South China Sea. Russia understood that America was obsequiously “flexible” and ready to push a red plastic reset button in times of crisis. ISIS assumed that American lawyers were vetoing air-strike targets. Iran guessed rightly that the Obama administration would concede a lot to strike a legacy deal on nonproliferation. It was unsure only about whether the Obama administration’s eagerness to dissimulate about the disadvantageous details were due to a sincere desire to empower revolutionary, Shiite Iran as an antipode to Israel and the Sunni oil monarchies, or arising from a reckless need to leave some sort of foreign-policy signature. Kim Jung-un concluded that the eight years of the Obama administration provided a rare golden moment to vastly expand its nuclear and missile capability — and then announce it as an irrevocable fait accompli after Obama left office. Again, the common denominator was that the Obama administration, in quite radical fashion, had sought a therapeutic inversion of foreign policy — in a way few other major nations had previously envisioned. Trump’s appointees almost immediately began undoing all that. There were no more effective avatars of old-style deterrence than James Mattis and H. R. McMaster. Neither was political. Both long ago embraced a realist appraisal of human nature, predicated on two ancient ideas: We all are more likely to behave when we accept that the alternative is far more dangerous to ourselves, and the world is better off when everyone knows the laws in the arena. Just as Obama’s pseudo–red lines in Syria signaled to the Iranians or North Koreans that there were few lines of any sort anywhere; so too the destruction of ISIS suggested to others that there might be far fewer restrictions on an American secretary of defense anywhere. On the cultural side, the Trump team figuratively paused, examined its inheritance from the prior administration, and apparently concluded something like “this is unhinged.” Then it proceeded, to the degree possible, to undo it. Open borders, illegal immigration, and sanctuary cities are the norms of very few sovereign states. They are aberrations that are unsustainable whether the practitioner is Canada, Mexico, or the United States. Calling a small pond or large puddle on a farm’s low spot an “inland waterway” subject to federal regulation is deranged; undoing that was not radical, but commonsensical. Trump sought to revive the cultural atmosphere prior to Obama’s assertion that he would fundamentally transform what had already been a great country. In 2008, it would have been inconceivable that NFL multimillionaires would refuse to stand for the National Anthem — much less in suicidal fashion insult their paying fans by insinuating that they deserved such a snub because they were racists and xenophobes. It was Byzantine that a country would enter an iconoclastic frenzy in the dead of night, smashing and defacing statues without legislative or popular democratic sanction. One would have thought that all Republican presidents and presidential candidates would be something like the antitheses to progressivism. In truth, few really were. The Un-Obama agenda was not simply reflexive or easy — given that Obama was the apotheosis of a decades-long progressive dream. After all, in year one, Trump has been demonized in a manner unprecedented in post-war America, given the astonishing statistic that 90 percent of all media coverage of his person and policies has been negative. Obama was a representation of a progressive view of the Constitution that about a quarter of the population holds, but in Obama, that view found a rare megaphone for an otherwise hard sell. One would have thought that all Republican presidents and presidential candidates would be something like the antitheses to progressivism. In truth, few really were. So given the lateness of the national hour, a President Nobama could prove to be quite a change.

Your Food Diary For:

Friday, January 19, 2018

BREAKFAST	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
Quaker - Instant Oatmeal- Maple, 6 packet	960	192	12	24	1,560	72
	960	192	12	24	1,560	72
L U N C H
Culvers Butterburger (2)"the Original"	720	78	32	40	1,020	12
Culver's - Fries	360	53	14	6	443	0
Add Food Quick Tools	1,080	131	46	46	1,463	12
D I N N E R
Sandwich - Peanut Butter and Jelly	700	55	31	17	286	31
	700	55	31	17	286	31
S N A C K S
Met Rx Big 100 Chocolate Cookie Dough	400	58	6	31	167	28
	400	58	6	31	167	28
Totals	3,140	436	95	118	3,476	143
Your Daily Goal	1,995	249	66	100	2,300	74
Remaining	-1,145	-187	-29	-18	-1,176	-69
	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
	*You've earned 65 extra calories from exercise today

.

SATURDAY WEIGHT     249.8 LBS

SH*THOLE COUNTRIES

OK, let's say that President Donald Trump did ask (obviously rhetorically) Why does the United States take all these immigrants from shithole countries? (or something like that)  If he did say it, it was said within the confines of a private meeting. It was not meant for public consumption. If he did say it, then Senator Dick Durbin is a jerk for announcing to the world that it was said. (Don't worry, Dick Durbin, no matter what you are still a jerk anyway)  What public leaders say in private is not a reflection of how they act. It takes a over-educated, brain-washed New York Times reader to be unable to differentiate between what is publicly said and what is publicly done. 

Actual Americans, those that do not think that the Bible is published every day under the banner of The New York Times know exactly what was meant by this (obviously crude) remark, that is, if it was indeed said at all and in private. Why don't we make efforts to accept as immigrants some of the best and brightest people who can immediately contribute to our country? I believe some of the most elite universities in our country discriminate and accept the best people available. I believe some of the most elite companies in our country discriminate and accept the best people available. Are you telling me that if an unemployed and unemployable person and a distinguished highly regarded doctor or engineer are applying for immigration status to our country - they are regarded equally?  Does this really make sense? Does our immigration policy ever regard the person individually? Are any efforts made to accept into our country some of the best and brightest that are clamoring to join us? I don't know. This is an honest question

.

Your Food Diary For:

Monday, January 15, 2018

BREAKFAST	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
Quaker - Instant Grits - Cheddar Cheese	600	120	9	18	2,820	6
	600	120	9	18	2,820	6
L U N C H
Poached Eggs	300	2	20	25	629	1
Sausage Links	200	1	18	10	480	1
Brownberry Whole Grain	240	44	5	8	300	8
	740	47	43	43	1,409	10
D I N N E R
Spicy Salmon Roll	350	51	10	14	711	0
Spider Roll	350	59	4	20	804	8
	700	110	14	34	1,515	8
S N A C K S
Klondike Bar	250	29	14	3	70	23
Chocolate Chip Cookies	350	45	19	4	227	23
	600	74	33	7	297	46
Totals	2,640	351	99	102	6,041	70
Your Daily Goal	2,162	270	72	109	2,300	81
Remaining	-478	-81	-27	7	-3,741	11
	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
	*You've earned 232 extra calories from exercise today

.



.

POCAHONTAS

Hey, lefties...Would you like to know one of the many reasons that half of America admires Donald Trump? It is because he has the balls to call out frauds when he sees one. The (dis)Honorable Senator Elizabeth Warren who gamed the system to claim to be a Native American is a liar. She is a fraud. What she is not, is a Native American. I hate to be the one to break this news to her and to all her sycophants - she is caucasian.  There is no more effective way to call attention to this phony than to derisively call her Pocahontas. If the shoe (or moccasin) fits, wear it. 

My 10 mile hike started AFTER 8PM and ended around 10:30PM. The weather was remarkably warm, and I was out and about in just two layers of t-shirt.

Your Food Diary For:

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

BREAKFAST	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
Quaker - Instant Oatmeal - Apples & Cinammon	640	132	8	16	800	48
Super 8 Cinnamon Roll	310	48	15	4	550	25
	950	180	23	20	1,350	73
L U N C H
Good to go - Deli combo, 1 sandwich	440	64	10	24	0	0
	440	64	10	24	0	0
D I N N E R
Jimmy John's - #14 Bootlegger Club Sandwich	660	66	27	43	1,750	0
Sushi - Philly Roll	400	50	15	23	0	0
	1,060	116	42	66	1,750	0
S N A C K S
Chewy Oat & Honey Cranola Bar	200	38	4	4	110	14
Protein Plus Protein Bar - MET-Rx	400	37	13	41	123	1
	600	75	17	45	233	15
Totals	3,050	435	92	155	3,333	88
Your Daily Goal	3,485	435	116	175	2,300	130
Remaining	435	0	24	20	-1,033	42
	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
	*You've earned 1,555 extra calories from exercise today

If every day were like today...   You'd weigh 223.5 lbs in 5 weeks.

GENUINE FAKE NEWS

To all of you lefties out there who keep your head buried in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the existence of honest-to-goodness genuine fake news from the dishonest media, here's the latest example. The two Morning Joe nitwits (Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski) on MSNBC (National Broadcasting Company subsidiary) aired a news show, the Morning Joe on Friday morning. Each day during the week this live moronic show is watched by braindead Americans in search of their morning fix of Republican bashing. On this day, both hosts talked about their Thanksgiving dinner on the previous day.  Then they went about their normal daily activities of bashing our President. One snafu emerged. This was a taped segment. MSNBC aired something that they tried to pawn off a a live broadcast when it was taped. Can you get more fake than that? Democrats are not hampered by the flow of time, the flow of history of the flow of facts to report news and draw conclusions. Here is another example: Former FBI Director, James Comey wrote a memo exonerating Hillary Clinton from the illegal email/server investigation BEFORE the investigation was completed. Any problems with that? For people with a functioning mind, there might be yes. For others, probably no. 

.

Your Food Diary For:

Sunday, November 26, 2017

BREAKFAST	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
Egg - Poached Egg	300	2	20	25	629	1
Grits	400	88	6	8	1,240	4
Bread - Whole-wheat, Toasted	200	37	3	8	427	16
Disney - Colby & Monterey Jack Cheese	200	0	18	13	325	0
	1,100	127	47	54	2,621	21
L U N C H
Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich	700	55	31	17	286	31
	700	55	31	17	286	31
D I N N E R
Turkey Leg	600	12	25	74	718	10
Lucerne - Ice Cream Bar	320	22	26	4	100	2
	920	34	51	78	818	12
Totals	2,720	216	129	149	3,725	64
Your Daily Goal	3,698	462	123	185	2,300	138
Remaining	978	246	-6	36	-1,425	74
	Calories kcal	Carbs g	Fat g	Protein g	Sodium mg	Sugar g
	*You've earned 1,768 extra calories from exercise today

If every day were like today...   You'd weigh 218.1 lbs in 5 weeks     

.


from the Washington Post
.

Style

‘Morning Joe,’ did you really just pretape your post-Thanksgiving banter?

.

The hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” did the usual day-after Thanksgiving kibitzing on the air on Friday morning, telling viewers about their turkey dinners and mentioning the big football game the night before. One problem: None of those things had actually happened at the time Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski and Co. started talking about them. The program that aired Friday morning was taped Wednesday, but made to look and sound as if it was airing live. “Morning Joe” airs live on MSNBC five days a week. It features discussions of breaking or very recent news events. Friday’s program had all the earmarks of a typical “Morning Joe” and few viewers seemed to notice that it wasn’t happening in real time. MSNBC offered no announcement or statement to viewers that it was a taped program. The only indirect clue was at the bottom of the screen: The “Live” graphic that normally appears was removed. The rest was cooked up to appear as if it was happening in real time. Brzezinski opened the program by saying, “Day after Thanksgiving! Hoo! I’m stuffed.” The second segment picked up the after-holiday theme. “I always cook the turkey with the guts in it!” Brzezinski said. “Joe didn’t notice. He ate the bag,” quipped co-host Willie Geist, pretending Scarborough had consumed Brzezinski’s theoretical turkey. “It was good!” Scarborough said. He added, “Well, you know, the game made up for it . . .” Scarborough then turned to Rick Tyler, an MSNBC contributor who was Sen. Ted Cruz’s campaign spokesman. “How was your Thanksgiving?” he asked. “Very successful,” responded Tyler. “Although the conversations were interesting.” “I bet!” said Brzezinski. The panel then swung into a discussion of the pedophile controversy surrounding Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore. The illusion that the discussion was live was fostered by the news crawl at the bottom of the screen, which was added over the taped discussion, and a clock showing the time in various time zones. The hosts never got around to talking about Friday morning’s biggest story, the deadly terrorist attack on a mosque in Egypt — because it hadn’t happened yet when they taped. The crawl mentioned it. An MSNBC spokeswoman declined to comment. But an executive confirmed that the program wasn’t live. “There was no intention to trick viewers,” she said. “Would it have helped if there was a disclaimer” referencing it as a delayed broadcast? “Maybe. But that’s not typically done.” As is, she said, “They’re having fun” with the pretense that it’s live. A longtime viewer of the program noticed that Friday’s edition had none of the usual discussion of breaking news and contacted The Washington Post to inquire if “Morning Joe” was presenting “fake news.” He said he was surprised to see Scarborough and Brzezinski appearing in a New York studio on the Friday after Thanksgiving. “I was quite flabbergasted by the way they were so deceptive about this . . . especially when they are always so quick to castigate lying [or] deception they attribute to others,” said the viewer, who asked not to be identified. Scarborough and Brzezinski have engaged in a long-running feud with President Trump over many issues, including the president’s veracity. The hostilities seemed to crest in June when Trump attacked the couple in an early-morning tweet in which he criticized Brzezinski’s appearance.