four Day retweeted
The small number of retarded racists who let their freak flag fly with their stupid white identity politics scared a lot of people off.
I know the right hates accusations of racism because the left weaponized them so dishonestly, but normies really do hate racial bigotry.
four Day retweeted
Quelles sont les "revendications légitimes" des manifestants exactement ? Ils ne sont pas contents parce que le revenu disponible réel n'augmente pas voire recule, mais ce n'est pas une revendication ça, c'est un sujet de mécontentement. Donc qu'est-ce qu'ils proposent concrètement ?
La réalité c'est qu'ils seraient incapables de faire la moindre proposition concrète réaliste. Si on leur demandait, tout ce à quoi on aurait droit ce serait des slogans débiles, plus de pognon qu'on n'a pas et la pensée magique habituelle selon laquelle il n'y a qu'à "prendre aux riches".
Mettons qu'on rétablisse l'ISF et qu'on instaure la taxe Zucman, honnêtement pourquoi pas si c'est le prix à payer pour qu'on puisse faire le reste, ça rapporterait 20-30 milliards à tout péter et il faudrait encore en trouver 100 de plus, donc où tous ces gens avec leurs "revendications légitimes" proposent qu'on trouve ça ?
🎙️ "Il y a des Français qui ont manifesté totalement pacifiquement, qui ont des revendications totalement légitimes et qu'il faut entendre"
@GabrielAttal, invité du 7h40 au micro de @c_landreau sur #RTLMatin
four Day retweeted
Le problème fondamental c'est que les gens ne comprennent pas que, pour financer un État-providence, il faut s'appuyer sur une base d'imposition très large et taxer la classe moyenne parce que les sommes requises sont énormes et qu'il n'y a pas d'autre choix.
En pratique, ça veut dire que d'une manière ou d'une autre, le financement repose principalement sur les revenus du travail, parce que non seulement c'est de loin la principale composante du PIB dans une économie moderne mais qu'en plus les revenus du capital sont beaucoup plus difficiles à taxer.
C'est pour ça que, dans quasiment tous les pays européens, le financement de la protection sociale repose principalement sur les cotisations et les taxes sur la consommation, qui directement ou indirectement sont principalement alimentés par les revenus du travail.
Même au Danemark, où l'impôt sur le revenu joue un rôle beaucoup plus important qu'ailleurs, l'assiette d'imposition est beaucoup plus large qu'en France et l'essentiel du financement repose aussi sur les classes moyennes, donc en dernière analyse principalement sur les revenus du travail.
Si vous consacrez 1/3 du PIB à la protection sociale, comme c'est le cas en France, vous allez forcément devoir financer ça principalement avec les revenus du travail, parce que c'est près des 2/3 du PIB et que les revenus du capital, outre encore une fois ils sont beaucoup plus durs à taxer, c'est 5 à 6 fois moins une fois prise en compte la dépréciation.
Il n'y pas de réserve de pognon dans laquelle on pourrait facilement taper sans que les classes moyennes doivent payer. On pourrait certes gratter un peu d'argent en taxant le patrimoine davantage, mais dès lors qu'on veut épargner les classes moyennes, ça n'ira pas chier très loin au regard des besoins si on ne réduit pas les dépenses.
Le seul moyen de financer nos dépenses de protection sociale, sachant qu'à l'heure actuelle on le fait à crédit en s'endettant à des taux qui ne font qu'augmenter, c'est soit de travailler plus soit d'augmenter la productivité et, comme on n'a pas de baguette magique pour augmenter la productivité et que ce n'est certainement pas en s'endettant pour financer les retraites plutôt que de l'investissement productif qu'on va le faire, il va falloir bosser plus ou couper dans les dépenses.
Si on continue de ne pas vouloir regarder la réalité en face, tout ce qu'on parviendra à faire, c'est rendre l'austérité encore plus douloureuse le jour où elle sera devenue inévitable parce que les investisseurs ne voudront plus nous prêter qu'à des taux exorbitants et, en attendant, mettre encore plus à l'os les services publics parce qu'il faut bien trouver le pognon pour financer les retraites et les dépenses de santé quelque part.
Quelles sont les "revendications légitimes" des manifestants exactement ? Ils ne sont pas contents parce que le revenu disponible réel n'augmente pas voire recule, mais ce n'est pas une revendication ça, c'est un sujet de mécontentement. Donc qu'est-ce qu'ils proposent concrètement ?
La réalité c'est qu'ils seraient incapables de faire la moindre proposition concrète réaliste. Si on leur demandait, tout ce à quoi on aurait droit ce serait des slogans débiles, plus de pognon qu'on n'a pas et la pensée magique habituelle selon laquelle il n'y a qu'à "prendre aux riches".
Mettons qu'on rétablisse l'ISF et qu'on instaure la taxe Zucman, honnêtement pourquoi pas si c'est le prix à payer pour qu'on puisse faire le reste, ça rapporterait 20-30 milliards à tout péter et il faudrait encore en trouver 100 de plus, donc où tous ces gens avec leurs "revendications légitimes" proposent qu'on trouve ça ?
four Day retweeted
Who’s organized enough to do this? We all know the answer; it’s the far left networks, which we know have ties to Russia. The far left is a threat to the Western world.
four Day retweeted
I see people blaming “foreigners” for these protests, but I think they forget how globalized the internet has made the world. The Japanese are just as chronically online as the kids here, and they’re exposed to the same propaganda as everyone else. It is what it is.
Massive protests in #Tokyo are calling for the Japanese prime minister to be ousted over his support for the United States and Israel.
🇵🇸🫂🇯🇵
four Day retweeted
The Australian government gave a $128,700 taxpayer funded grant to Michael West Media - the outlet that helped radicalise the terrorist who tried to murder Helen Haines.
four Day retweeted
Sorry, but the people at The Guardian need to be tried at The Hague and imprisoned for the remainder of their natural lives for crimes against humanity. The headline is first-degree divisive rage bait, and the image of the angry Black woman is reaching Mammy-level racial caricature status. I would bet any amount of money that they specifically instructed this poor woman not to smile for the photograph.
If you actually read the article, then you’ll know it’s just promotion for a museum exhibit on Shakespeare’s influence on modern Black writing. That’s all! That’s all it is.
There was no kanging.
'A new Washington DC exhibition examines how Toni Morrison, Maya Angelou and more used the Bard’s work to help tell their own stories.'
theguardian.com/artanddesign…
four Day retweeted
Matt Yglesias argues that to boost affordability, an administration could "work line by line through the array of federal laws and regulations and try to strip away everything that raises the cost of living."
Example #1 of such a law/regulation is the Jones Act: – at Washington, DC
four Day retweeted
Hello guys, I did some digging.
Registration for the car that hit Australian MP Helen Haines: XCK 017.
Car appears to be owned by Brendan Nugent, a radical leftist anti-Israel Houthi supporter.
His handle is @NotLaoTzu
four Day retweeted
The thing that Democrats most want out of immigration policy — an impregnable external barrier that will let them go soft on interior enforcement without inviting new chaos — is not possible and this is more a governance problem than a messaging one.
slowboring.com/p/dont-get-co…
four Day retweeted
"You reduce crime by eliminating poverty."
This is one of the greatest intellectual confusions of our century. It sounds compassionate. It feels obvious. And the moment you actually test it, it falls apart.
Let's look at the data.
First, the correlation is real. Nobody serious denies that poorer areas have more crime. In Sweden, kids from the poorest 20% of families are about 7 times more likely to be convicted of a violent crime than kids from the richest 20%.
But correlation is not causation. So Swedish researchers did something brilliant: they compared siblings. Same parents, same home, same upbringing, but different family income at different points in their childhood, because parents' income moves over time.
Result, on more than 500,000 children (Sariaslan et al., British Journal of Psychiatry, 2014): once you account for what's shared inside the family, the effect of income on violent crime goes from 7x to nothing. The hazard ratio drops to 0.95. No effect.
Finland ran the same test on 650,000 people. Same result: the income-crime link disappears when you compare siblings.
What predicts crime isn't the bank balance. It's what travels inside families.
Second test: what happens when poverty spikes for everyone at once? 2008. US unemployment doubled from 5% to nearly 10%. 15% of Americans officially poor. If poverty creates crime, crime should have exploded. Instead it fell. Year after year. Robbery, the most "economic" crime of all, dropped 10% in 2010 alone. Criminologists literally said they were stumped. Same story in the Great Depression: 25% unemployment, and crime went down in many cities.
Third test: take families out of poverty and see. The US government ran a randomized lottery called Moving to Opportunity. Thousands of families in public housing got vouchers to move to low-poverty neighborhoods. For boys, violent arrests dropped at first, property crime arrests went up, and over time the effects faded. New zip code. Same behavior.
Fourth: the claim that police don't matter. This one is just false. Chalfin et al. (American Economic Review: Insights, 2022): each additional police officer prevents about 0.1 homicides. And per capita, the lives saved are twice as many among Black victims as among white victims. The people who suffer most from "police don't matter" are the poorest neighborhoods.
So what does predict crime? The Dunedin study followed 1,000 children from birth to age 32. Self-control measured between ages 3 and 11 predicted adult criminal convictions, even after controlling for social class and IQ (Moffitt et al., PNAS, 2011). Cognitive ability matters too: across 700,000 Swedish men, lower cognitive scores at 18 track with violent convictions, and the link barely moves when you control for childhood socioeconomic status (Frisell et al., 2012).
And here's the part nobody quotes: in Dunedin, kids whose self-control improved over time did better than predicted. Behavior can change. Which means responsibility is real.
Why does this matter? Because "poverty creates crime" isn't just wrong. It's toxic.
It turns criminals into victims. The man who robbed you becomes a symptom of "the system," and you, the real victim, become a footnote in someone else's narrative.
It merges two completely different things. "You're poor, we'll help you" is one policy. "You're poor and you committed a crime, so we'll excuse you" is another. Fusing them insults the millions of poor people who work, raise their kids, and never hurt anyone. The vast majority of poor people are not criminals. That alone kills the theory.
It removes responsibility. Build a political system on "your circumstances made you do it" and you destroy the one thing that actually changes behavior: the certainty that you own your choices. Every excuse the state manufactures is an incentive.
And it feeds the state forever. If every crime is a social failure, every crime justifies a new program, a new budget, a new agency. Crime becomes the business model of bureaucracy.
The alternative is simple and old.
A lighter state that protects instead of explains. The same rules for everyone, from the projects or from a gated community. Certain, swift punishment for anyone who commits a crime. And never, ever telling someone their crime was written in their social condition.
Treating someone as responsible is respecting them. Excusing someone because they're poor is the most condescending thing you can do to them.
This quoted post is unavailable.
four Day retweeted
Matt Yglesias is 100% right, actually. The 1,500-hour pilot rule was passed after the 2009 Colgan crash. Except the captain had 3,379 hours. The first officer had 2,244 hours.
It’s pure security theater that's driven up the pilot shortage & made flying more miserable for us all.
unavailable
four Day retweeted
Drag Queens have almost nothing to do with transgenderism by the way.
Those are gay men doing a comedy routine. They're not autogynephiles.
four Day retweeted
“Why are young people economic leftists?”
I can’t answer this question for the francophone world, but in the United States my answer/s would be:
1) young people are broadly extremely misinformed about the structure of Western economic systems. Many of them are convinced that our economies are far more laissez-faire and deregulated than they actually are.
2) young people are extremely misinformed about the sheer quantity of government spending, and especially how much the government spends relative to the income/wealth of the richest people (e.g. all the assets of every billionaire in America would fund single payer healthcare for a year and a half)
3) young people broadly feel like the ability to accumulate wealth is not a benefit to them and like they are locked out of systems of asset accumulation.
4) in youth circles, economic griping is paradoxically often “high status.” developing radical political approaches wrt cost of living is generally viewed positively.
Replying to @favelaoverlord @Y2K_mindset
the naturally follow-up is “why do they think that’s the solution?”
four Day retweeted
Sorry but I don’t think China wants to destroy the US-led world order. They benefit immensely from the status quo. They have been one of the biggest winners of the current world order.
four Day retweeted
Likely true. Or a Jew.
The actual point here is that SELECTIVE migration, intentional or not, is good.
What would Nigerian AMERICANS riot about - closure of a solid dental school at a Research 2?
four Day retweeted
A lot of people who demand “basic human empathy” often have extreme levels of sadism towards those who they believe “deserve it” like the United Healthcare CEO
The problem with mass immigration is that you’re inevitably letting in a lot of people who are sympathetic to arguments like this one, people who feel natural sympathy for and solidarity with foreign cultures, and I just don’t think it’s true that this has no long-term consequences, even if they aren’t always immediately obvious.







































