by | BLOG
The BBC is one of the largest media organizations in the world, reaching hundreds of millions of readers per week. However, their articles covering the Israel-Hamas war have contained blatant violations of honest reporting as well as their own editorial guidelines. These are not isolated incidents; abuses have occurred over 1,500 times in their coverage of the Israel-Hamas war.
Research conducted by lawyer Trevor Asserson found substantial evidence of bias against Israel, including a tendency to associate Israel with genocide – despite the fact that Israel has never by word or deed, expressed any intention of eliminating Palestine or its people, and Hamas has expressed openly and consistently their desire to eliminate Israel and its Jews from the face of the Earth (genocide). The report also raises concerns about BBC Arabic’s coverage, noting instances where journalists reportedly showed support for Hamas.
In response, the BBC questioned the report’s methodology, particularly the use of AI for analysis. However, dismissing the report based on AI is disingenuous, since they don’t contest the validity of the findings. AI is a powerful tool for analyzing large volumes of text efficiently and objectively, enabling researchers to identify patterns and biases that might be missed by human reviewers. Its application does not undermine the report; instead, it enhances the analysis by providing a comprehensive view of the content. Additionally, the research was conducted by a team of legal experts and data scientists, meaning that AI analysis complemented, rather than replaced, human oversight and contextual understanding.
The BBC’s insistence on questioning the methodology is clearly just a smokescreen since they don’t even deny the bias and shoddiness of their reporting. Historical evidence shows that media outlets can exhibit bias, and previous studies validate the effectiveness of AI tools in uncovering such biases across various contexts. As a public service broadcaster, the BBC has a responsibility to uphold transparency and accountability. Given these findings, there are serious questions about its suitability for continued public funding.
by | BLOG
People laughed at Amazon’s Alexa when it was discovered that asking a question regarding Kamala Harris would give you a good positive answer, but asking about Trump would give you a negative answer. We were told that this was corrected, and in fact, if such questions are asked now, Alexa will simply reply that she cannot respond to questions of a political nature.
But what constitutes a political question? I decided to find out. So I asked Alexa to tell me about Kamala Harris‘s tax policy. She responded that she found the following information from a website. Alexa then proceeded for at least 2 1/2 minutes extolling the wonderful virtues of Kamala Harris‘s tax policy — except that it was blatantly partisan garbage and factually incorrect. For example, Alexa described how Harris strongly believed that lower capital gains rates are needed for economic growth. Therefore, she is proposing to reduce the capital gains rate from Biden’s proposal of nearly 50% to a mere 28%. But this is an utter lie! The Capital gains rate is currently 20% and has been since the Obama Administration. Harris’s proposal actually raises the capital gains rate to 33%, despite the fact that she knows it will hurt economic growth.
I then asked Alexa to tell me about Donald Trump’s tax policy. Alexa simply replied, “sorry I don’t have any information about that.” Nevermind the fact that he was a US President for four years and has been a candidate for President for two election cycles!
It is clear that Amazon is disingenuously building partisan politics into its Alexa app, despite its protestations that it is not doing so.
by | BLOG
Kamala Harris has just proposed a reduction in the capital gains rate increase that had been included in the Biden-Harris tax proposal. The reduction was from Biden’s 43.4% proposed rate to a 33% rate, both of which are ludicrous from an economic perspective. (Note that even the 33% rate is a 40% increase from the present rate of 23.8%!). A capital gain rate that high would severely inhibit people from selling assets at a gain. This would actually reduce the amount of revenue to be raised from this tax. Furthermore, the effect of higher taxes slows the economy because those paying the higher capital gains have less money to invest.
Back in 2008 when Obama was debating Hillary Clinton on national TV, Obama discussed with the moderator how raising the capital gains rate would likely reduce federal revenue collections, but he insisted it was good policy anyway — because it was a policy of “fairness”. Yes, knowledgeable people laughed at this, since fairness would actually have required a lower tax rate, and decreasing revenue by increasing taxes couldn’t be more stupid. And as Economics 101 would dictate, we actually experienced a sluggish economy after Obama raised the capital gains rate from 15%-20% (and then tacked on the 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax).
I wouldn’t expect Kamala Harris, who is basically clueless on matters of taxes and economics, to have been aware of this. But one would think that her advisers would be.
It should also be noted that the capital gains rate, even at 33%% understates the actual tax burden. That’s because capital gains taxes on individuals is actually a second tax, this income having already been taxed at the corporate level. The effective tax rate is therefore in excess of 40%, and this doesn’t even include state taxes. The astoundingly negative effect of this tax increase on economic wealth can’t be overestimated.
The only saving grace is that this proposal is so economically counterproductive and stupid that it’s not likely to get any traction in Congress; Biden has been trying unsuccessfully to raise capital gains for years. It looks like we have another candidate who puts forth an initiative that she knows has very little chance of realization, but chooses to do so anyway so she can characterize the Republicans as protecting the wealthy while she can claim to protect the middle class.
by | BLOG
The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) have amassed ridiculous levels of control over U.S. ports, leveraging their historical influence, and union monopoly power to dominate port operations nationwide.
One of the most glaring issues with the ILWU and ILA’s monopolistic grip on U.S. ports is the staggering compensation packages their members receive, which are wildly disproportionate to the work performed. Longshore workers, particularly on the West Coast, often earn six-figure salaries, with some senior members making well over $200,000 annually, along with massive benefit and pension plans. This level of compensation, secured through the unions’ ability to shut down entire ports during negotiations, places a significant financial burden on port operations, driving up costs for businesses and consumers alike. The inflated pay and benefits, which far exceed those of comparable jobs in other sectors, are a direct result of the unions’ monopolistic control, creating an unsustainable system that prioritizes union interests over economic efficiency.
Another significant and damaging way the ILWU and ILA maintain their grip on U.S. ports is through their fierce opposition to automation. Despite the clear benefits of increased efficiency, lower costs, and improved global competitiveness, these unions staunchly oppose automation, because it weakens their power (Wikipedia) (APM Research Lab). As a result, U.S. ports are significantly behind their global counterparts in adopting advanced technologies, leading to massive disruptions that affect the entire economy. The unions’ resistance to modernization highlights a deeper issue: when union monopolistic power is left unchecked, it can bring progress grinding to a halt and hold entire industries back from necessary evolution.
If the U.S. wants to maintain its position as a global economic leader, it must address the stranglehold that the ILWU and ILA have on our ports. This is about ensuring that our ports can operate efficiently, compete on a global scale, and keep costs down for American consumers and businesses. We need immediate action to break the union monopoly, modernize port operations, and embrace automation. Policymakers must step in to introduce reforms that will bring balance to labor negotiations, promote technological advancement, and prevent unions from holding the entire economy hostage. America’s place in the global economy depends on it.
by | BLOG
People have been asking about the reasons for the recent stock market decline. But the real question is: why has there been this run up recently in the first place?
The Biden-Harris administration has benefitted from the situation that since before the pandemic, job openings in the US have far exceeded the total number of unemployed people. Markets have been buoyed by the fact that as people lost their jobs, they were able to replace them with those that had been previously unfillable. In addition, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been giving a significant additional boost to the economy.
For these reasons, the terrible Biden-Harris economic policies have been pushed into the background, which include:
1) severely increased regulation — including restrictions on mergers and acquisitions, SEC burdens, NLRB restrictive labor policies, etc.; 2) substantial tariffs; 3) threats of, and implementation of, higher taxes; and 4) legislation directing the use of wasteful and inefficient green energy policies
But they could only be lucky for so long. Now that the excess jobs in the economy have mostly been filled, leading to increasing unemployment rates and weakening of the GDP, the terrible Biden-Harris economic policies are beginning to be felt. And there is no end in sight. Should Kamala Harris win the election in November, and these policies continue, I believe there could be a severe recession. The market realizes that there is no reason for companies to invest, and prospects for the future have turned quite gloomy.
Even with Trump winning in November, unless he is able to materially reduce regulation, keep taxes low, and avoid his debilitating tariffs, there could still be a recession ahead.
The lesson we have learned is clear: high regulation, along with the threat of higher taxes, can only be severely detrimental to the economy.
by | BLOG
With Donald Trump as the nominee, the Republicans adopted a 20-point platform. Here’s a rundown of the good, the bad, and the ugly:
1. Seal the border, and stop the migrant invasion
This is absolutely correct, although the devil is in the details as to how this could be done.
2. Carry out the largest deportation operation in American history
Though it is certainly beneficial to having a deportation program, creating a huge new government bureaucracy to effect this would be a huge mistake. In contrast, a carefully targeted program of selected deportation could be very valuable, especially in letting people know that future immigrants entering illegally will be prosecuted.
3. End inflation, and make America affordable again
This is a very understandable statement — “ to end inflation” — but without an indication of the specific policies to accomplish this, it is somewhat meaningless. This is especially true given that some of Trump’s stated policies such as protectionism and keeping and increasing tariffs would be highly inflationary.
4. Make America the dominant energy producer in the world, by far!
I couldn’t agree more. This is also very easy to accomplish by just eliminating Biden’s ridiculous restrictions on fossil fuel permitting drilling and leasing.
5. Stop outsourcing, and turn the United States into a manufacturing superpower.
This is possibly the most ignorant of these platform considerations. Outsourcing has been historically responsible for keeping inflation under control and for allowing American workers to focus their capabilities on higher-end employment. The United States is currently a major manufacturing superpower, with its manufacturing capability and output close to its highest ever in U.S. history. The manufacturing that is done in this country, i.e. high end products, is already here. Inducing lower value-add manufacturing will not only reduce wages of American workers, but increase prices to domestic manufacturers, thereby making them less capable of competing in the world markets.
6. Large tax cuts for workers and no tax on tips
Large tax cuts are always a good thing for economic growth, but given the current state of the deficit and debt there would need to be a rational way to pay for these. Also sometimes the devil is in the details as to what constitutes a tax cut for workers – it must undoubtedly be structured as a rate cut rather than a handout, so that growth will result.
The concept of “no tax on tips” is a nonsensical, not-well-thought-through idea. There is no reason that tips should be taxed less highly then other forms of income. Furthermore, administration of such a position would be extraordinarily difficult. It would also induce all parts of the economy to reorient their compensation in the form of tips rather than normal wages.
7. Defend our constitution, our Bill of Rights, and our fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to keep and bear arms.
Again, although the specifics aren’t laid out, this is a clear and important platform component.
8. Prevent World War Three, restore peace in Europe and in the Middle East, and build a great Iron Dome missile defense shield over our entire country- all made in America.
“Prevent World War Three and restore peace in Europe and in the Middle East” are great sentiments, but I have seen no policy proposals that would even begin to address these. A strong US military that uses overwhelming power to subdue Iran and its proxies could work, but I haven’t heard anything like this from Trump.
A great Iron Dome missile defense shield over our entire country sounds like it could be a good idea, but my guess is that it is ridiculously impractical. And that it should be all “made in America” is an economically ignorant concept. When we pay much more than we need to in order to accomplish any task (which is what “made in America” actually means), then we are much less likely to accomplish this at any feasible and reasonable cost.
9. End the weaponization of government against the American people
This is very important. Big government overburdening regulation has been devastating to the growth of the U.S. economy. Scaling back the powers of government agencies and their overpowering ability to destroy companies by pushing never ending, ever-growing regulation, must be stopped.
10. Stop the migrant crime epidemic, demolish the foreign drug cartels, crush gang violence, and lock up violent offenders.
Stopping the flow of illegal migrants, as noted in point #1, is critically important. But the entire concept of a migrant crime epidemic is just plain false. Though there are some highly publicized and horrific crimes perpetrated by illegal migrants, the statistics on immigrant crime is crystal clear. Illegal immigrants commit crimes at rates significantly lower than native-born Americans. This is consistent with what seems rational– that is, if you’re an illegal alien, and want to stay in this country, you keep a low profile and avoid criminal activity. It should also be noted that legal immigrants commit crimes at even substantially lower rates than illegal immigrants.
11. Rebuild our cities, including Washington DC, making them safe, clean, and beautiful again
This could be good or bad depending on the actual implementation of such a thing. How are our cities to be rebuilt? Who will pay for it? And to what extent can the federal government be effective in what is clearly a state and local problem (except for Washington DC)?
12. Strengthen and modernize our military making it, without question, the strongest and most powerful in the world
Without question, this is one of the most important platform items given the volatility of the world today, and further considering the disdain in which our country is now viewed militarily by the likes of Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea.
13. Keep the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency
The dollar will remain the world’s reserve currency as long as the U.S. does not allow its financial strength to deteriorate, such as by allowing continuing deficits, ever growing debt, and increasing socialist tendencies which are degrading America’s growth prospects.
14. Speak for and protect Social Security and Medicare with no cuts, including no changes to the retirement age
Again, this is an extraordinarily economically ignorant platform position. This position basically requires that Social Security benefits for existing beneficiaries will decline by approximately 22% when the Social Security fund runs dry in approximately 10 years. The Social Security system as presently constituted pays to existing beneficiaries far in excess of the actuarial value that they contributed. And this excess is being paid for by present workers, who therefore will have nothing left from their contributions to pay retirement benefits to themselves. Rational fixes, such as those proposed by Nikki Haley, would include raising the retirement age, making the annual inflation adjustment more rational, and potentially adding a little more means-testing to the system. These adjustments would be phased in, and would not affect current beneficiaries or those within a few years of retirement. But if fixes are not made, then in ten years, existing beneficiaries will bear the brunt of the refusal to fix the system now.
15. Cancel the electric vehicle mandate and cut costly and burdensome regulations
This is absolutely critical and important. The electric vehicle mandate, on any rational cost-benefit analysis, is wasteful beyond belief. It also interferes with the freedom of Americans to buy what they want to buy. As the Supreme Court has indicated in the Obamacare case, the federal government cannot force U.S. citizens to buy what they don’t want to buy.
Cutting costly and burdensome regulations are critical. Cost benefit analysis would clearly show that agencies have irrationally instituted regulations by making unsupportable calculations of cost benefit. These regulations must be eliminated.
16. Cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, radical gender ideology, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children
This is an extremely important and necessary platform position, although we must be careful to not trample freedom of speech and other rights while doing so.
17. Keep men out of women’s sports
This is absolutely absolutely important, and supported by an overwhelming percentage of Americans.
18. Deport pro- Hamas radicals and make our college campuses safe and patriotic again
I fully agree, insofar as pro-Hamas radicals are clearly defined as those violating individual and property rights of others, and not just exercising their rights of free speech.
19. Secure our elections, including same-day voting, voter identification, paper ballots, and proof of citizenship
Securing our elections is critically important, including proof of citizenship, before one is entitled to vote. I believe however, that reasonable people can disagree on details, and I hope that these details can be accomplished in a bipartisan way.
20. Unite our country by bringing it to new and record levels of success
This is a feel-good ending to the platform, which will be accomplished by proper consideration and implementation – or not – of the first 19 provisions.
by | BLOG
President Biden’s college debt forgiveness programs are not only illegal, but morally and ethically wrong, and economically stupid. It certainly has appeal to those whose debt is forgiven – after all, that is the payment for their votes. But to no one else.
College loan forgiveness is, at its core, a wealth transfer. Despite what the left would have you believe, it simply takes from those who have little and gives to those who have much. The Biden administration estimates that 27.6 million borrowers (around 64% of all borrowers) will have some or all of their debt forgiven. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (UBS), college graduates make on average $67,860 per year compared to $38,800 per year for non-graduates, which is a 65% gap. Biden’s plan necessitates taking from those in society who are already in the lowest income bracket to give to the college graduates of the country.
So, not only is it morally and ethically wrong, it’s also just bad policy from an economic perspective. It sends the wrong message to borrowers who willingly took out loans to finance their education. When individuals take on debt, they have a responsibility to repay it. Forgiving student loans undermines personal accountability and discipline, creating a moral hazard by encouraging future students to borrow more, assuming their debts will also be forgiven someday. This would fuel inflation in higher education costs and perpetuate a cycle of debt and forgiveness. And it is also a slap in the face to those who have already paid their debts,
It is also illegal. President Biden does not have statutory authority to forgive debt, except by direction of laws passed by Congress (as the Constitution makes perfectly clear). “Justification” for his forgiveness is to claim as his authority laws that were clearly never intended for that purpose.
Forgiveness also does not deal with the root cause of spiraling costs, which are directly linked to the Federal government guaranteeing student loans, without a single thought given to the loan recipients ability to repay like any private entity would do. A study published by the New York Federal Reserve Bank found a direct connection between federal student aid and tuition increases, every dollar of subsidized student loans, increased tuition by about 65 cents.
Student loan forgiveness is not a solution but a short-sighted and lazy attempt to buy votes. It is an illegal action which fails to address the root causes of rising education costs and unfairly shifts the burden on taxpayers who did not benefit from higher education loans.
by | BLOG
A few years back when Kamala was chosen as the VP candidate, I compiled a list of Kamala foibles; now that she’s the Democrat candidate for President, I decided to dust it off. It’s important to know that she had committed some rather egregious trespasses as a prosecutor. Just as disturbing is her fluctuating policy positions, calling into serious question her attempt to presently appear as a criminal justice reformer. Instead, Harris should be known for 1) her criminality and very poor judgment as a prosecutor 2) her hypocrisy, and 3) her opportunism.
One of the biggest areas of concern is her prosecutorial misconduct. In many instances, she basically acted as a rogue prosecutor who should have possibly been charged criminally for her own actions in some of the following incidents:
*During a case in 2015 in which a prosecutor concocted a confession from the defendant, thereby leading to the case being dismissed, Harris’s Attorney General’s office appealed the dismissal.
*During a case in 2015 in which a prosecutor in his case fabricated information to a jury relating to compensation to an informant, Harris’s Attorney General’s office fought the defendant’s appeal.
*During a case in which the entire Orange County DAs office was removed from the trial for failure to turn over evidence, Harris sought to block the removal.
*During a case in which a man was wrongfully imprisoned for 13 years, Harris’s office attempted to keep him locked up.
*After a crime lab technician purposefully tainted evidence in a vast amount of cases, Harris hid his actions while acting as a San Francisco DA.
Furthermore, Kamala Harris has worked on rebranding herself from previously being tough on crime to more sympathetic to justice warriors. For instance:
* Until 2014, Harris was against the legalization of marijuana while acting as the Attorney General of California.
* Harris declined to support criminal justice sentencing reforms that were on the ballot in California in 2012 and 2014.
* Harris’s office opposed an order to lessen the amount of prisoners in California, while supporting the use of prisoners as laborers due to the low cost.
* During her time serving as the Attorney General in California, Harris supported the dubious practice of civil asset forfeiture under the guise of going after drug operations.
Additionally, Harris was eager to be in the spotlight while moving up the political chain in California; two ridiculous incidents in particular come to mind.
*While running for US Senate, Harris’s office arrested the owners of Backpage, a site for classified sex workers, after publicly declaring that they “were protected from prosecution under federal speech law.” The case was promptly thrown out by a judge.
*While running for US Senate, Harris’s office went after for-profit colleges in California as part of an Obama initiative, while subsequently refusing to release any buyer of potential future liability– meaning anyone purchasing would be under constant threat of a lawsuit. Subsequently, no buyer would accept the terms. The Corinthian college system therefore shuttered 23 schools, putting people out of work and education.
Kamala Harris has repeatedly shown to have no moral compass. Her actions as a prosecutor should be alarming, as well as her hypocritical flip-flopping of positions. Kamala has shown to be a mercurial political opportunist who merely parrots Biden’s egregious fiscal and foreign policies, and she has no business being a Presidential candidate.
by | BLOG
Kamala Harris first came on my radar in 2015, when she partnered with the Department of Education to close some for-profit colleges in California when she was the Attorney General. In an earlier post on the subject, I noted that Harris worked in conjunction with the Department of Education specifically targeting the Corinthian College system. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Last summer the Education Department began to drive Corinthian out of business by choking off federal student aid for supposedly stonewalling exhaustive document requests. The Department claimed to be investigating whether Corinthian misrepresented job placement rates as California Attorney General Kamala Harris alleged in a lawsuit.”
Corinthian agreed to turn over their education centers to other non-profits, but Kamala Harris refused to release any buyer of potential future liability, meaning anyone purchasing would be under constant threat of a lawsuit. That November, “the nonprofit Education Credit Management Corporation (ECMC) “agreed to buy more than 50 Corinthian campuses for $24 million plus $17.25 million in protection money to the feds for a release from liability. But ECMC passed up Corinthian’s 23 schools in California because Ms. Harris wouldn’t quit.” The alternative to having no buyer for these particular schools would ultimately be to shut them down.
It was in April 2015 that Corinthian was slapped with the $30 million fine, which effectively drove the final nail in the coffin of the remaining schools because no one in their right mind would shoulder the liability. As for the hefty penalty, “The Department assessed the maximum fine of $35,000 per regulatory violation, which its bureaucrats count as each student that was improperly counted.” By the end of the month, all the rest of the schools indeed closed, throwing out of employment and school, thousands of people.
What makes this whole affair particularly odious is that that “the federal government [didn’t] specify how for-profits calculate their job placement rates. States and accrediting agencies have disparate and often vague rules, which notably don’t apply to nonprofit and public colleges.” Thus, Corinthian Colleges was really just a part of the larger assault on for-profit colleges by the Obama Administration, all tied to his “Gainful Employment” rules.
Part of the new regulation change dealt with colleges and federal aid, and Corinthian was a ripe target. What’s more, the Department of Education found a ready and willing partner in Kamala Harris, who, at the time, just happened to be running for a very important Senate seat in California at the time, the seat of retiring Barbara Boxer. She was elected a year later. Harris demonstrated her willingness to play along to get along. Even now, nearly a decade later, some things haven’t changed.
by | BLOG
I get email from all sorts of groups, but this one caught my eye earlier today. “Jews United for Democracy and Justice” invited Andrew Weissmann as a speaker for a talk entitled, “THE QUEST FOR ACCOUNTABILITY: An Expert’s Analysis of Trump’s Liabilities” to be given on Wednesday, 6/26. The fact that Andrew Weissmann is speaking on accountability is hypocrisy in its purest forms, given his history of despicable lawyer practices.
During the Colombo crime cases in the 1990s, Weissmann withheld exculpatory evidence and was reprimanded for doing so by a judge in the Eastern district of New York. Several years later during his tenure as head of the task force investigating Enron, he intimidated witnesses and made repeated threats, resulting in his abrupt resignation in the midst of jury deliberations. Similarly, Andrew Weissmann persecuted and prosecuted Jim Brown, a Merrill-Lynch executive, for a deal with Enron during which Weissmann concocted evidence and hid Brady material, and then repeatedly lied to the court about having such material. Initially, Jim Brown was found guilty and sent to prison, but the fraud and conspiracy charges were later overturned for him and three other Merrill Lynch executives.
Likewise, Andrew Weissmann brought an indictment against the Arthur Andersen firm as an entity arguing that it covered up for Enron. No indictment against a company for the action of one person had never been done before — or ever since. But in the end, no crime was actually ever committed, as determined later by a unanimous 9-0 Supreme Court decision. During the oral argument, the Court viciously ridiculed the theory that Weissmann used in order to charge the crime in the first place. Unfortunately, that exoneration came too late: Weissmann had destroyed an 89-year-old accounting institution and eliminated 85,000 jobs by distorting the law, denying the defendants a fair trial, and taking intent out of the jury instructions.
In 2013, Weissmann faced ethical charges before the First Judicial Department Disciplinary Committee in NY for his outrageous behavior, including hiding evidence and lying to the court, during the Enron trial. But the Committee passed the disbarment issue on to the Eric Holder DOJ in DC, who buried the charges.
Having Weissmann give a talk about credibility is utterly laughable. For all the people they could have invited to talk about Trump, he is the absolute worst. Weissmann does anything to win, including violating all moral and ethical principles. Weissmann should have been disbarred years ago; having him as any speaker anywhere whatsoever denigrates the organization that invites him.
