just a normal watching the world change before my eyes...

Reality
Joined March 2009
This 👇
There is nobody coming to rescue us. This is it.
2
9
1,471
Ole Ericson retweeted
As many of you know, in recent days Data Republican has been releasing transcripts, videos and audio recordings of a group of groups plotting to use violence to force President Trump to take protective actions (i.e., the Insurrection Act) that will result in the overthrow of our Constitution in favor of the will of Democrat governors. These groups include former USAID employees and other ex-national security officials, and the plans they discuss are straight out of the color revolution tactics, techniques and procedures those same people have been using for decades to overthrow foreign governments unfriendly to the USA. This is the biggest news story in decades, right? Yet no one in the mainstream media will touch it. Except to defend it. See the below headline from today’s Washington Post (I’ll link to the full article below). The plotters behind this effort are obviously alarmed by the recent public uncovering of their conspiracy, so they have done what any reputable Democrat determined to overthrow the electoral choices of the American people would do: run to a friendly press outlet to drop a soft-pedaled puff piece to run top cover for their efforts, and blame Trump. If you read this article, it does not talk about a coup conspiracy. Instead it talks about a bunch of well-meaning, patriotic, anonymous ex-national security officials simply trying to protect America from the evil dictator Trump destroying “our democracy.” This article itself is straight out of the color revolution tactics—it’s propaganda designed to condition a populace to accept illegitimate actions. The Washington Post is part of the plot. Stay frosty, friends. This will get worse before it gets better.
529
7,237
374
19,522
384,749
Ole Ericson retweeted
Capitalism has a win condition. Socialism does not. Here's why, explained so simply a 10-year-old could get it. It starts with a book written in 1944 by an Austrian economist named Friedrich Hayek: The Road to Serfdom. Imagine a classroom of 30 kids. One day the teacher says: "From now on, I decide what everyone eats for lunch, which games you play at recess, and who sits next to whom. It's fairer that way." First problem: the teacher doesn't know what you like. You hate carrots. Your friend is allergic to peanuts. Lucas wants to play football, Emma wants to draw. 30 kids, 30 different wishes. Nobody can know all of that, not even the smartest teacher on Earth. Hayek called this the knowledge problem. The information needed to run an economy is scattered across millions of heads, and it can't be gathered in one office. Second problem: the kids start fighting. "Why does he get the window seat?" "Why football again?" Before, everyone just chose for themselves. Now every choice is a fight, because every choice is made for everyone. Third problem: the class can't agree on a plan, so someone says "we need one person in charge who just decides." This is Hayek's key insight. Planning doesn't fail because planners are evil. A plan needs everyone to agree on the same goals, and free people never agree on everything. So the plan needs force to work. Fourth problem, and it's the scariest one: who wants that job? The kind kid doesn't want it, because the kind kid doesn't want to force 29 people to eat carrots. The job attracts the one who likes giving orders and doesn't mind punishing those who disobey. Hayek wrote a whole chapter on this, called "Why the Worst Get on Top." It doesn't happen by accident. It happens by selection. Here's the trap. When the person who controls your lunch also controls your job, your home, your shop and your newspaper, they control your whole life. You can't say no, because there's nowhere else to go. Controlling the economy doesn't mean controlling one part of life. It means controlling the means to every goal you have. That's the road to serfdom. Nobody votes for a dictator. People vote for "someone should fix this," then for "give them more power to fix it," and one day they wake up with no one left to say no to. The USSR, Maoist China, Cambodia, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. These are different countries with different cultures and languages, and the story has the same ending every time. When a script produces the same ending every time, it isn't bad luck. It's the script. Now capitalism. Back to the classroom. Instead of one teacher deciding everything, every kid can trade. You give me your carrots, I give you my apple, and we both walk away happier. Nobody needs to know what everyone wants, because prices do that job. A price is a message telling millions of strangers what's scarce and what's wanted, with no one in charge. That's the win condition. In capitalism, you get rich by making something other people freely choose to buy, so your success depends on serving others. In a planned system, you get ahead by pleasing whoever holds power. One rewards usefulness. The other rewards obedience. And this isn't theory. Two centuries ago, almost every human being was extremely poor. In 1990, about 38% of humanity still lived in extreme poverty. Today it's under 10%. More than a billion people escaped it in a single generation. It happened when China, India, Vietnam and South Korea opened up to markets, trade and private enterprise. The largest reduction in poverty in human history came from letting people trade. So why do so many people hate capitalism? Because what they hate usually isn't capitalism. They hate the bank that got bailed out with their taxes while they lost their house. They hate the giant company that writes the regulations so no startup can compete with it. They hate rent they can't afford because building new homes has been made nearly impossible. They hate the lobbyist who gets a subsidy while the small business owner drowns in paperwork. Look closely at each one, and you'll find a state handing out privileges. A bailout is not the market. The market would have let the bank fail. A regulation written by incumbents is not competition. It's protection from competition. None of this is capitalism. It's cronyism, which is what happens when businesses stop competing for customers and start competing for politicians. People see the symptom and blame the wrong cause. They say "capitalism failed" and ask for more state. That gives more power to the same people who created the problem, and it puts us right back on Hayek's road. The answer to bad capitalism isn't less freedom. It's less privilege. That means fewer bailouts, fewer protected incumbents, fewer permits, and more people allowed to build, compete and trade. Capitalism has a win condition: make things people want. Socialism has an end condition: someone has to be in charge. And history keeps showing us who ends up in that chair.
Capitalism has a win condition. Socialism does not.
61
709
63
2,520
79,523
"When a script produces the same ending every time, it isn't bad luck. It's the script."
Capitalism has a win condition. Socialism does not. Here's why, explained so simply a 10-year-old could get it. It starts with a book written in 1944 by an Austrian economist named Friedrich Hayek: The Road to Serfdom. Imagine a classroom of 30 kids. One day the teacher says: "From now on, I decide what everyone eats for lunch, which games you play at recess, and who sits next to whom. It's fairer that way." First problem: the teacher doesn't know what you like. You hate carrots. Your friend is allergic to peanuts. Lucas wants to play football, Emma wants to draw. 30 kids, 30 different wishes. Nobody can know all of that, not even the smartest teacher on Earth. Hayek called this the knowledge problem. The information needed to run an economy is scattered across millions of heads, and it can't be gathered in one office. Second problem: the kids start fighting. "Why does he get the window seat?" "Why football again?" Before, everyone just chose for themselves. Now every choice is a fight, because every choice is made for everyone. Third problem: the class can't agree on a plan, so someone says "we need one person in charge who just decides." This is Hayek's key insight. Planning doesn't fail because planners are evil. A plan needs everyone to agree on the same goals, and free people never agree on everything. So the plan needs force to work. Fourth problem, and it's the scariest one: who wants that job? The kind kid doesn't want it, because the kind kid doesn't want to force 29 people to eat carrots. The job attracts the one who likes giving orders and doesn't mind punishing those who disobey. Hayek wrote a whole chapter on this, called "Why the Worst Get on Top." It doesn't happen by accident. It happens by selection. Here's the trap. When the person who controls your lunch also controls your job, your home, your shop and your newspaper, they control your whole life. You can't say no, because there's nowhere else to go. Controlling the economy doesn't mean controlling one part of life. It means controlling the means to every goal you have. That's the road to serfdom. Nobody votes for a dictator. People vote for "someone should fix this," then for "give them more power to fix it," and one day they wake up with no one left to say no to. The USSR, Maoist China, Cambodia, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. These are different countries with different cultures and languages, and the story has the same ending every time. When a script produces the same ending every time, it isn't bad luck. It's the script. Now capitalism. Back to the classroom. Instead of one teacher deciding everything, every kid can trade. You give me your carrots, I give you my apple, and we both walk away happier. Nobody needs to know what everyone wants, because prices do that job. A price is a message telling millions of strangers what's scarce and what's wanted, with no one in charge. That's the win condition. In capitalism, you get rich by making something other people freely choose to buy, so your success depends on serving others. In a planned system, you get ahead by pleasing whoever holds power. One rewards usefulness. The other rewards obedience. And this isn't theory. Two centuries ago, almost every human being was extremely poor. In 1990, about 38% of humanity still lived in extreme poverty. Today it's under 10%. More than a billion people escaped it in a single generation. It happened when China, India, Vietnam and South Korea opened up to markets, trade and private enterprise. The largest reduction in poverty in human history came from letting people trade. So why do so many people hate capitalism? Because what they hate usually isn't capitalism. They hate the bank that got bailed out with their taxes while they lost their house. They hate the giant company that writes the regulations so no startup can compete with it. They hate rent they can't afford because building new homes has been made nearly impossible. They hate the lobbyist who gets a subsidy while the small business owner drowns in paperwork. Look closely at each one, and you'll find a state handing out privileges. A bailout is not the market. The market would have let the bank fail. A regulation written by incumbents is not competition. It's protection from competition. None of this is capitalism. It's cronyism, which is what happens when businesses stop competing for customers and start competing for politicians. People see the symptom and blame the wrong cause. They say "capitalism failed" and ask for more state. That gives more power to the same people who created the problem, and it puts us right back on Hayek's road. The answer to bad capitalism isn't less freedom. It's less privilege. That means fewer bailouts, fewer protected incumbents, fewer permits, and more people allowed to build, compete and trade. Capitalism has a win condition: make things people want. Socialism has an end condition: someone has to be in charge. And history keeps showing us who ends up in that chair.
5
Ole Ericson retweeted
We also didn’t have Muslim terrorists running for office in 1776, but the First Amendment covers them.
Abdul El-Sayed on the Second Amendment: "When they promised the right to bear arms, they had muskets. So, yeah, everyone should have equal rights to a musket."
4
16
97
2,827
Ole Ericson retweeted
One of the fun parts about legacy media personalities saying that non-citizen voting is “rare” is that the single largest state in the country has no way of verifying if that’s true, and proudly acts like you’re stupid for even asking if they try
Massive concession: Los Angeles election officials just told a federal court they have no independent way to verify citizenship beyond what voters attest. (They simply take their word for it.) Under federal law, only citizens may vote in federal elections. Yet California has not acted on the list of 20,000 suspected noncitizens or agreed to set aside their ballots. American citizens’ votes are being diluted in California.
5
69
1
402
4,828
Ahem. Five years ago I wrote a column about DNA test results that showed there was a 99.999998 percent chance that Ilhan Omar and her second husband Ahmed Elmi were siblings. A few hours before we went to press my informant was arrested by Biden's FBI. Funny that.
341
12,136
206
49,729
812,163
Ole Ericson retweeted
🚨Elon Musk: A Tesla employee was fired for violently assaulting a woman who stepped on his prayer rug. Months later he murdered three students in Austin. This is not religion. It is a political ideology that places its rules above your rights and answers “insults” with violence. It is incompatible with democracy and freedom. Import the ideology, import the violence.
225
5,342
111
14,855
145,778
Ole Ericson retweeted
Dear republicans, don't like the protests in France? Maybe you should consider what happens if us Democrats lose the midterms. Vote Democrats for peace. 🌊
🤝 Paid partnership
4,651
55
238
416
133,447
Ole Ericson retweeted
Parasitic third world savages are not sitting out the election. They’re voting straight Democrat so they can force you to pay for all their stuff. Get to the voting booth and cancel out their votes.
Yesterday in Lewiston: @TheMaineWire Reporter @MaineWireJon watched Somali “translators” help several elderly Somalis vote. Notably, all the “translators” work for taxpayer-funded NGOs and Medicaid agencies. This is how you turn a working class town into a Dem stronghold.
53
938
16
4,110
28,844
Ole Ericson retweeted
Rioter in France. “In the name of Allah, we will kill them all!” But apparently it’s about classrooms.
487
12,410
810
32,240
323,158
This African immigrant is going viral for peeing in a train. How far will people let this go? Mass deportations should be on the table at some point.
169
300
24
1,202
80,161
Ole Ericson retweeted
SOROS: George and his son, Alex, are the largest individual donors to the Democrats this midterm cycle.
67
263
26
592
11,074
Ole Ericson retweeted
HOLY CRAP Ilhan Omar and her husband's winery was SHUT DOWN for FRAUD after they reportedly sold EMPTY WINE BARRELS
1,332
7,214
302
45,134
1,090,678
UNBELIEVABLE: Roughly 60,000 fewer Americans A YEAR died of drug overdoses because Trump closed the border. It's an astounding accomplishment.
521
4,266
250
16,027
289,296
Ole Ericson retweeted
Replying to @RealDanZak
Perhaps the league should move its operations to a country that better reflects its values…
27
14
785
22,315
Ole Ericson retweeted
No Kings PROTESTERS still have NO CLUE why they’re protesting🤣🤣🤣🤣
774
2,134
186
13,183
256,146
France has FREE health care, paid parental leave, paid family leave, FREE child care, FREE preschool, 5 weeks paid vacation, a 35 hour work week, generous unemployment and housing benefits, and heavily subsidized higher education. Everything the left says they want AND THEY'RE STILL PROTESTING AND BURNING SHIT DOWN.
4,703
31,613
2,125
128,397
3,517,314
Ole Ericson retweeted
If you live in one of the gray states, your governor has blocked scholarships from the new Trump federal scholarship program from being given to kids in your state. And I would recommend upgrading to a better governor.
1,050
10,744
1,038
27,388
648,527