World’s Most Damaging Policies

From https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/the-potential-impact-of-electric-vehicles-on-global-energy-systems

No, this post is not about the policy of switching to Electric Vehicles (EVs), though from the above chart, and having lived through the Texas Freeze (2021) (just barely), it could be plenty damaging. But let’s understand the chart. A 25% switch to EVs would cause a 30% increase in peak electric grid load. So a 100% switch would cause about a 120% increase in grid peak load. Let’s just round that off and say the grid would have to double. That’s just in the US, already a high electricity consumer. In countries with less electricity usage, their grids would have to way more than double.

How fast has electric capacity been growing? Below is the chart for the US:

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States

Since about 2005 it hasn’t been growing at all. Before that, it took 30 years to double. The switch to EVs by 2050, needed to meet climate goals, would require doubling again in 30 years. But that double is twice as big as the last double, twice as many power plants, twice as many transmission lines. To meet climate goals, ALL of that and then some would have to come from renewables. Look at the chart. What are the chances? Zero. Period. This is unobtainable. One would be better off working on Faster Than Light technology to move us off planet (I’m being sarcastic, in case you are dreaming FTL is actually possible).

But the analogy with FTL is apropos. I am disgusted at the level of naïve “dreaming” in public policy in the minds of ordinary voters.

Can we simply live with less energy, a lot less? No. It is required for basic food production and distribution. The population is too high to live with dramatically less energy. Food systems are responsible for one third of human caused greenhouse emissions. See https://www.carbonbrief.org/food-systems-responsible-for-one-third-of-human-caused-emissions .

That leaves only one solution, population reduction. This is actually quite easy and low impact. It might be a little late to make it all the way to low human impact on the environment by 2050, but with a crude world natural death rate of 7.7 per 1000 a 24% reduction is easily possible by 2050, which is probably larger than any other one green measure!

How do we do this?
– Stop paying people to have children
– Start paying them not to

For nearly a century we in the US have had financial incentives to have children:

  • tax credits
  • AFDC payments
  • people who don’t have children pay for the education of children
  • religions against birth control
  • laws against many forms of abortion
  • etc.

And still we are increasing these subsidies for population growth. You can see from the list why politics makes me extremely angry. I consider the above list the most damaging policies in the world (because they lead to “growth” of problems, not just a fixed factor). About half of them are supported by Democrats/liberals and half by Republicans/conservatives. I hope both parties burn in hell. Well, with climate change they probably will, except I’ll burn with them.

I have only one child, and only when I was 62 years old. I paid all my life taxes so other people could educate their children (school taxes) and have illegitimate children (AFDC). If I vote against those policies, then I also vote against birth control of all kinds. This is not a choice at all.

In China a one-child policy, implemented by a totalitarian regime, not voluntary as I’m suggesting above, quickly elevated them to the 2nd greatest economy on Earth.

Bunk on needing more population to have economic growth. Companies are converting to Artificial Intelligence and robots as fast as they can. After COVID lockdowns, people have got used to not working. It’s easier to rethink the economy than double the power grid while simultaneously going all green.

If that doesn’t suit you, let’s see your design for an FTL drive, implementable before 2050.

Against Democracy

Being ruled (-cracy) by someone else (demo = the people, auto = self which is not the way it is usually used, pluto = a small group of royals or oligarchs which often happens with or without democracy) is not my cup of tea. There is no reason I would consent to it. So it requires no justification to dispute.

We hear a lot of how laws restricting voting or “making it more secure” are a non-partisan issue and “simply wrong.” I will disengage this issue on two points. First of all, one party seems to prefer them so automatically they are partisan and those who loudly proclaim otherwise are just demagogs. I have no sympathy for either side. I don’t like demagogary and voting restrictions are a poor fix to the real problem of democracy, which is that voters will vote themselves largesse, and most are not capable of running the country. The modern world is so complex, no one is capable of running it or any major part of it.

Is there an alternative to democracy? Certainly, but not plutocracy of any kind. That is just an exclusive democracy where I don’t get a vote.

Beyond the obvious of self-interest voting, you might get a country established at one point in time where either the majority of the population is somehow enlightened, or self-interest somehow produces an OK result. The trouble is, it won’t last. The makeup of the population with change. Attitudes will deteriorate directly due to the success of the system (people get spoiled and come to feel entitled).

And a principal objection to democracy is that it rewards population growth. In nature, simple population growth is NOT generally favored by natural selection. Instead, predator and prey, prey and food, they stay in rough balance. Humans do not. The latest theory is that their oversized brains have allowed them to adapt after causing the extinction of one kind of prey and then another, resulting to their own slavery to population growth. Yes, hunter gatherers had 80% free time and better nutritional health. Both declined with agriculture, and still further with industrialization.

Inequality among humans only appears in settlements larger than about 8,000 the archaeologists tell us. Farming productivity increases so that everyone is not necessary. The excess people move to cities and invent things to do, like mass produce pottery and ploughs for farmers, and build houses for each other. Being everyone is not strictly necessary, this puts them in a weak negotiating position. Those better at extortion get ahead.

Also brain size decreased with the transition to agriculture. This was probably necessary for the extensive level of cooperation. Scientific results show intelligent people cooperate less. Everyone cooperates less when game theory is explained to them. According to a famous 2012 paper by Press and Dyson, extortionary strategies come to rule all games, and if both sides have a theory of mind (most humans do), all games eventually become ultimatum games. Sounds like politics, right? Right.

Consider the population of the world at 7.5 billion. There is not room on the beaches or in the parks I used to frequent. If everyone drives a car, much less flies, apparently we flood the coasts and ruin the temperature. Below is a map of where population is increasing fastest.

World population growth rates

Ah, the people in red and pink will rule the world shortly due to their increasing numbers and the increasing use of democracy. I scan the news from every region of the world daily using the BBC (one of the few news services that covers all the world regions, though coverage in China is limited by government policy there). There is a qualitative difference. Issues in Australia are trivial. Issues in the pink and red regions, even the tan ones, are serious. There are as many democratic governments there as not, but it doesn’t seem to make much difference. I do NOT want them ruling me. I do not consent to a world ruled by democracy, period, end of discussion. It is not open for discussion. That is my opinion. And eventually they will move to the US, so I do not consent to immigration. This is NOT a partisan issue. It is just plain common sense.

Let me dispose of one objection quickly. Liberals typically feel people are programmable. For the easy cases, if you talk to them for an hour you can convince them of anything. Lacking that, if you can indoctrinate their children you can change them in any way. Well, it just isn’t so. Study after study shows such methods are only about 50% effective. I have a new research paper proving mathematically that if you made it somehow more effective, this would wreak havoc on the world. See Deleterious Behaviorally Transmitted Traits in Equilibrium.

Keeping the status quo while going to green energy, much less improving standards of living (which we have come to expect world over) just isn’t going to happen. Producing the lithium, rare earths and other commodities needed to run the world on EVs requires maybe 6 times the mining activity we have today. See New climate goals are going to need a lot more minerals.

Well, if you only had 7.5 / 6 = 1.25 billion people, same as in about 1875, you’d already have enough mines. Increasing the mining means burning fossil fuels. You aren’t going to run a lithium mine on batteries, sorry.

World Population Growth - Our World in Data

Europeans weren’t running the world by democracy in 1875, and they sure aren’t running it now. The Asians and Africans will be running it. Not even Latin American will get much of a say. Really the Chinese will be running it. They improved their standard of living through a one-child policy. Not through democracy, or even “managed capitalism.”

I would like to see a 10x increase in MY PERSONAL energy usage, and a 100x in my son’s and 1000x in his son’s, and so on up through about a 10 billion x increase which begins to be enough for interstellar travel. Even if a good bit is off-planet usage, that suggests the world population has be be decreased to a few million souls. That is plenty for genetic diversity. For most of pre-history the human population fluctuated between 50,000 and 300,000. That was enough to create civilization. It is enough to go to the stars. Too many won’t make it.

However, governance through democracy will favor, even require, population increases as factions vie for power. So I’m against democracy. China did not “vote” on the one child policy. I’m against “-cracy” generally (rule by someone else). So let’s just remove the incentives to have boo-koo unnecessary children beyond what is a survival advantage, and come back into long term natural selection balance.

The first step is each family gets one vote, and this vote is divided among their children. It never increases. If the family population decreases, grandchildren might get several votes (inherited from different ancestors).

Eliminate all subsidies for children, even the income tax credit. Instead, give a credit for childlessness or just one child.

Eliminate automatic citizenship due to birth on US soil.

That’s a start. Leave other suggestions in the comment area.

Will US living standard rise or fall in the next ten years?

Some thoughts stimulated by new US census data…

  • Population is an often overlooked factor in whether living standards improve or decline, and also in political sensibilities, conflict, etc.
  • Recall that the big driver behind the 3rd Reich was “room to grow.”
  • Archaeologists have found inequality only arises in communities with over 8000 population.
  • Britain became a great power by having small families and passing inheritance entirely to one or two heirs.
  • China was basically obliterated by western powers during the colonial era.  Its empire completely fell.  Its democratic government fell.  When I was a kid, it was common for parents to encourage us to eat by talking about the starving children in China.  What turned it around was not communism, nor IQ, nor work ethic.  It was their one child policy.
  • The theory of cycles of civilization developed first among Chinese scholars.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynastic_cycle .  This is a very different view than the European view of “one and done.”  I believe, after a lifetime of studying civilizations, this comes from the agricultural and climate patterns of the Middle East.  Rivers change course and rainfall diminishes and salt accumulates in irrigated areas, and a civilization there does not again arise in the same place due to geographic and climatic changes.  Civilization migrated through Phoenicia and Anatolia to Europe.  Italy/Rome repeated the agricultural cycle as the thin volcanic soil around Rome eroded and individual farms became impractical.
  • This is not to say that greed and corruption do not become entrenched, they do, but by themselves they do not cause the fall.  Geo-climatic factors do that.  The first great city, Uruk, existed for 1500 years until the river changed course.  The largest egalitarian community Catal Hoyuk existed for 1400 years until a river changed course.  Catal Hoyuk population was in equilibrium for most of its existence, varying between 5,000 and 7,000, not exceeding 10,000. 
  • However, standard of living and how people feel about life is not well correlated with the “success” of a civilization.  Citizens of a great civilization may be quite miserable.  The problem here is humans’ own adaptivity.  It has caused the species to fail to develop (or to lose) any population set points (feedback set points).  A recent theory attributes this to prey size decline (aka extinction of megafauna) https://phys.org/news/2021-03-human-brain-grew-result-extinction.html .  BTW, brain size has declined since advent of agriculture.

  • The population of the US is growing at its lowest rate since the 1930s.  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56896154  What I find interesting is that it grew at such a low rate in the 30s, and that my mother who lived during this time always felt the quality of life in the country improved, not just relative to the depression lows of the 30s, but also relative to the boom years of the 20s.  BG feels the quality of life has notably declined since the 50s (as do many Americans, especially white Americans).  The lower population growth may portend a different future trend. 

Texas population has been increasing fast.  Therefore, there is no feeling of improvement of quality of life in Texas.  The parks I once enjoyed are too crowded to enter.  It is no longer possible for me to enjoy a day at the beach.  One is shoulder to shoulder with other people and the sand is completely packed.  Areas like Canyon Lake require sitting in traffic for one to two hours just to go down a 30 mile road.

It is generally conceded that populations do have a kind of set point in that population growth does increase as wealth increases.  However, this is vastly different for different cultures.  If we are to preserve any freedom of choice in the world, then we cannot permit economists to suggest that we equalize standard of living across different cultures. 

To do so would mean that everyone except the population with the lowest set point would be miserable.

Further, democratic governance requires a roughly homogeneous set point across the geographic region to which it is applied.  Otherwise the lowest set point reproduces at the highest rate and gains control, removing freedom of choice and eventually extincting cultures with higher set points.

Due to this peculiarity, fully democratic governance and freedom of migration implies a downward evolution in standard of living set point.

Notice that people will immediately disagree over this point. “Standard of living” is a qualitative value. One can always choose metrics that go either up or down. For example, healthcare or transportation range may go up, while free time goes down. Primitive people have about 80% free time. Farmers have less. Modern people have even less than farmers. The argument that civilization arises from free time does not actually fit the facts. https://rewild.com/in-depth/leisure.html . If I choose my free time as the primary metric (I do), then standard of living has been declining for at least 10,000 years and no one can refute that except to cite value differences, i.e. to criticize freedom of choice.

Lithium deposits are projected to run out around 2100 if we all drive EVs.  However, if there were only 750 million of us instead of 7.5 billion, a number I’d be much more comfortable with, a number that represented the world population as recently as 200 years ago, lithium would last until 3100, or perhaps indefinitely with recycling.  No insurmountable industrial waste would accumulate. 

There is an interesting chart by country here https://www.visualcapitalist.com/world-population-2100-country/ which suggests countries like Nigeria, Ethiopia, Pakistan and DRC will have a much larger say in the world by 2100 and their values will greatly influence standards of living and other cultural factors.   

COVID Early Unlock Texas-Mississippi

Mississippi and Texas have announce opening of all businesses and recension of mandatory mask wearing as of March 6th. I have closed my state simulation files, but just for a rough idea what this means looked at a US model run with that unlock date. In the figure below this is compared to my baseline assumption of May 1 full unlock. Scroll down for discussion.

The heavy blue dots are the baseline prediction. The green line is the baseline unlock degree (unlock on May 1). The small pink dots are a simulation run for a March 6 unlock. Cases are up around 90% in a short period of time. This would likely trigger a re-lock.

Mortality would not be up that much because many high risk persons have been vaccinated.

This simulation includes the new more contagious strains, but they seem to be spreading faster than my assumption which is that they would require 3 months to fully take over.

The full unlock case will not be realized for three reasons. First, not everyone will return to their former activities and remove their masks. Second many people have lost jobs, some businesses are permanently closed, and interstate and international travel is still restrictive. And third, major retailers (so far Starbucks and Target) have announced they will continue to require masks and limit the number of customers in stores. Others are likely to follow suit. Whether Walmart and grocery stores follow suit will be a big factor. If the effectiveness of the unlock is 50%, this produces a 15% increase in total cases (not shown).

While I could have argued a year ago for a less restrictive lockdown resulting in herd immunity during the more easily controlled summer months, I cannot argue for this early unlock now. The damage to the economy is already done and little is gained by it. I suggest most people should continue wearing masks and postpone major activity increases until May.

COVID cases from winter and testing

Based on COVID SIR model, fitting data to (a) best information about unknown/known case ratio, (b) portion of declining mortality attributed to including less critical cases in reported data, (c) projections which fit incoming new data.

I have a background in safety and modeling the combination of human behavior and complex systems (spacecraft, transportation, etc.) to determine accident or crash rate. Since late March I’ve been modeling COVID, gradually developing models as sophisticated as any available.

In July I became aware that the relative number of unknown cases was diminishing fast enough to undermine projection accuracy. I went on vacation for a month instead of looking into it, as I was totally burned out.

Recently the US and European media have been reporting “spikes” in cases and talking about severe lockdowns. That scared me, because I think lockdowns are more damaging that people realize. According to one paper, half as many people died from the lockdown in the US in March and April as from COVID for reasons such as having heart attacks and not going to the ER.

A seasonal rise in cases – similar to the flu – was baked into COVID from the start. This was WELL KNOWN by April. Many studies were done based on temperature and humidity and several papers were published. The average seasonal effect for the US is 20%, but colder regions like NY have a 30% effect.

Spikes over the summer were from “easing.” Spikes now are likely to be from cold weather.

But the spike now, should it be so large? Where I live (Houston) I do not see any “easing” going on. It gets tighter every week for the last two months.

So reluctantly I began two weeks ago to look into the changing case ratio. If you do a lot of testing, the number of reported cases goes up, even if the “actual” number of cases goes down or remains the same or only goes up slightly.

It is easy to check this. If less critical cases are included in the totals, mortality should look like it is going down. It has, in the US from over 8% of reported cases to only about 1%.

Of this factor of 8, by fitting projected model data to actual new data coming in, it appears a factor of 4 is due to increased testing, and a factor of 2 is due to improved medical understanding of and handling of critical cases. Not everyone needs intubation, and steroids keep the body from killing itself. COVID blocks a friend/foe identifier on lung cells, and the body attacks itself and dies even while the virus load is declining.

The results are startling. Our lying, hateful president is finally right about something, like a stopped clock is right twice a day. Who’d have thought.

We should not go into a severe lockdown. Instead we should skip phase 3 trials and immediately start vaccinating people. Approximately 20,000 people in the US will die for every month we delay.

We’ve never had a situation like this is vaccination history. We’ve had situations where the number of people who might die from a bad vaccine was a few hundred or thousand, and the number of lives saved by the vaccine was lower, maybe a few dozen. But in this case the numbers are reversed. Dramatically.

Forks in the Road 2014 & 2019

I was investigating whether other market segments were keeping up with the S&P 500, which seems to be ignoring the plight of ordinary people and charging ahead in spite of COVID-19. To my surprise, the biggest forks were in mid-2014 and early-2019.

In 2020, there was a sharp divergence with the S&P 500 getting ahead in April by about 8%, but after that the various segments mostly came along together:

Comparison of large and small and micro caps and US vs. world markets, 2020, from Yahoo Finance

But the forks in 2014 and 2019 both have lasted up through the present:

Same comparison from 2015

In 2014, mid-year, it is easy to identify suspect events that led to a continuing 9.5% per year differential, with emerging markets and world-other-than-US essentially flat while the US grew rapidly:

  1. Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions on Russia
  2. Emergence of ISIS and counter attacks
  3. Unrest in Yemen
  4. Fracking boom and downturn in oil prices

These problems led to mass migrations, affecting Europe. So Russia, North Africa, and the Middle East have all been in turmoil since. The crash in oil prices caused economic decline in parts of the Middle East that avoided war, and in Venezuela, while the US benefitted from fracking and becoming an energy exporter.

If you have other ideas for the fork in 2014, please leave a comment below.

The causes of the 2019 fork inside the US, which happened early in the year, January or February, are harder to identify. Democrats took over the House of Representatives, causing some stalemate in government. This gradually led to focusing on the border wall and impeachment instead of governance. But did this really affect the fortunes of smaller companies more than larger ones? The mechanism is unclear to me.

It is interesting to plot the price of oil over these periods.  There is a correlation with both 2014 and 2019, which would seem to indicate that the world economy does better with a higher oil price.  But of course this may be a consequence, not a cause.

Oil prices last ten years, from https://www.macrotrends.net/2516/wti-crude-oil-prices-10-year-daily-chart

Perhaps you can think of another correlate. Please leave a comment below, and a chart if possible.

The Sun-Dried Tomato Violin

My 5-nearly-6 year old son Grandon complained his little 1/8 violin was boring.

Mostly he meant the sound, but the grain-less orange finish isn’t exciting either, so I decided to use it for a refinishing project.

My Sun-Dried Tomato Violin
Actual sun-dried tomatoes

(Grandon also has another view of it – looks like a volcano eruption. Well, if 5 year old’s had money I’d be a rich violin maker. I can do eruptions!)

I ran out of finish remover and tried to cover the remains of the orange with a dark brown stain and paint artificial grain. But it kept coming off.

Frustrated I (mostly) removed that and covered it in dark red, by go-to cover-up-mistakes violin color scheme. Hmm, not bad. Scrape off the edges to give it a little definition. I was going to stain those caramel and blend it, but I decided to ask Grandon. He likes things better when he chooses.

Keep the red and nearly-white. OK, so just a little Tung oil for gloss and done, except for the waiting. Neither of us wanted to wait more than a day, so I hung it in the sun to dry.

Outside, hanging in a bush, it just looked like a tomato drying in the sun. So I asked Grandon about the name. Keep that too. Thus I present to you, the Sun Dried Tomato Violin! (Awww…, thank you, thank you, really, it wasn’t anything, just covering up mistakes)

Back view, center left, looks just like the tomatoes

COVID Policy is about the Euphoria of Ruling the World

Every two-bit official can now order the world around them to stop. Just. Stop. Even judges. Doesn’t have to be a governor or mayor.

Forget the logic and think about how that feels for a minute. Consciously I’m sure they agonize over it. But the power is incredible. No one is unaffected by that sort of power.

If they admitted they didn’t need to be giving such orders, they’d suddenly feel empty and useless. Kind of like I did for a year after retirement. They don’t have to be getting anything else out of it to get hooked. Just the Endorphins. What does an alcoholic get? Drunk, broke, divorced, cited for DWI, but they can’t quit. It’s the same.

Reuters
Texas Governor Greg Abbott on Thursday decreed that face masks must be worn in all counties with over 20 coronavirus cases. USNews

Maybe Texas governor Abbott can’t walk (no disrespect intended) but he can order you to wear a mask (no objection, actually) and not gather in groups of more than 10 people (not doing that either, but clearly somebody was).

The Texas forecast was not that bad. I’ve been modeling COVID trajectories for 4 months full time (yeah, retirement flexibility). I’ve published 3 papers on my work and built an international website. Let’s look at the EFFECT of the recent order. Previously, Texas had a pretty good forecast:

We were at the peak this weekend (July 4th) and economic recovery was a good 30% (of a year lockdown losses). Hardly any fall or winter cases despite continual step increases in easing.

Here is the transmission rate chart. It suggest the order was extraordinarily effective. Those points at the end are falling off a cliff:

Looks about like 10% more locked than before. Let’s assume by school in September some unlock about to the previous level will be attempted again. Here is what that looks like.

Oh look Mom, I made the number of deaths go UP 25% by locking down tighter. What?

Yes. Well, the near term cases fall off a cliff, so of course Texans will demand to be unlocked, and that’s what Gov. Abbott promised, “billing the measure as a requirement to avoid another economic shutdown“. There are already mask protests.

Look how slowly cases creep back even though the unlock is the same as now, and it’s high season for Coronavirus, winter. By March, when hopefully we are vaccinating people, a minor hump backs down. That’s when I think we’ll really let the horse out of the barn. And despite a vaccine cases will rise nearly to present levels, and the peak will be broader and thus more deadly.

If you think the level of information on coronavirus is a bit iffy (not the raw data, the inability to use it to make decent projections), then take my 12 minute survey which includes a video explanation (5 minutes) of how this stuff works, and gives you interactive access to the model right in your web browser. Uses Texas for an example, but you can type in the name of any state or country and it comes right up. Put in your own unlock levels and see if you’d make the grade as an epidemic manager! Ultimate gaming! Life and death reality! Click to begin your journey.

Let’s end Optimism (before it ends us!)

Protesters demonstrate against the national security law in Hong Kong (01/07/20)
Democracy protestors in Hong Kong defying both COVID and a new law promising life sentences to protest removal of pro-democracy books from libraries, BBC

What? Yes, not a misprint. The handover of Hong Kong to China occurred 23 years ago this month. Oh, sure, it was ill-gotten in an Opium War. So what? China had been ripping off The West in trade for 5000 years and refused to accept any payment but gold for tea.

Gold for tea? You’ve got to be kidding? No, actually, not. Dire circumstances called for dire measures. You can’t really run a global empire without caffeine.

In 1842 in the Treaty of Nanking HK was ceded “in perpetuity.” By 1898 the British, feeling guilty already, rephrased it as a 99 year lease. Brilliant. No wonder the British Empire is no more. I could say something, maybe about Queens or something, but I’ll just let you ponder it. Napoleon at least lost fair and square in a fight.

A little connection with America too. Remember the Boston Tea Party? To help pay for their tea, the British Royal shareholders were granting the East India Company a tax-monopoly on tea imports to the colonies. Exploitative bourgeois American businessmen and slaveowners like George W. didn’t go for it, and fought an 8 year war to protect their own interests. The proletariat went along because they had all lost relatives and land in the French & Indian War (my ancestor in South Carolina – see you didn’t even know the war went that far south).

The real reason the British gave Hong Kong back was they were physically unable to keep it. It is barren rock. All the food and water are in Kowloon and China, which is not Argentina (Falklands, remember?), promised to march in the PLA. See The Globalist for this admission. Stuck with a poor strategic decision, in 1898 the British invented the “fiction” of the 99 year lease thinking they would solve the problem later, not really give it back. But later, beat by two World Wars, seeing the US unwilling to go against China in Korea, they started optimistically rationalizing.

Later, during the Thatcher era, and still later when accomplishing the handover, British desire to sell to the Chinese market was used as leverage by China to secure the Hong Kong deal. The British, in a way, simply sold it. Businesses in Hong Kong also were willing to kowtow to China for profit. See The Last Governor.

But the rationale was that China was softening, and this would soften them even faster. Hong Kong would not become like China. China would become, at least “more like” Hong Kong.

Even the Chinese were overly optimistic. “In 1984, China’s then senior leader Deng Xiaoping told Margaret Thatcher that if China did not become more like Hong Kong when it was time for the area to be fully integrated with China, then they would probably have to wait a bit for the transposition.Even the protesters are overly optimistic:

If we burn you burn with us. QZ.com

The end of the Cold War, the belief COVID could be “contained,” the idea Democracy was a cure for all ills, that Globalism would make people more cooperative not just extorted and defiant? Optimism will end us.

Why I support COVID parties

I am 69 and isolating. But the cost to me of a year of isolation, at 69, is maybe 12% of my remaining lifetime.

US male life expectancy 78.5 years

My risk of dying from COVID in Texas is two orders of magnitude lower than that:

click for detailed Texas risk profile

My wife, 46, does not want to get COVID. That is the primary determinant of my isolation. If we already had COVID, I could send my son to school in mid August without worrying. We get everything. He won’t follow social distancing at age 6. The small private school will try, and most likely fail.

In Oxford, MS there were some large fraternity rush parties, superspreading events. Here is the county’s forecast following those events. The state forecast is similar, since those kids carry it everywhere. It wasn’t a deliberate COVID party, but my sister, who lives in Oxford and has a chronic lung condition AND a son entering college there, says there have been COVID parties among that age group.

click to enlarge at ShulerResearch.org

Zoom in and you’ll see they are half way to the peak. There is no stopping it. Then by early August they are done.

I wear a mask. These kids don’t bother me. Scientific American says that the way this works is, for future generations babies will be born not immune, they will get COVID and few of them will be seriously ill.

That and not a vaccine is what will control it. It is a free country. If the young are willing let them.

Hospital resources, you say. 80% of people on ventilators were dying. Up to 50% of people on ventilators for that long will die if nothing is wrong with them. ICU availability is no cure. It’s a token effort, to make society feel like it is doing all it can. We’ve since learned most patients just need oxygen, not tubes and blowers. It’s a guilt trip. But why?

In a globalist society, everyone has to conform to the same ideas. That’s what makes it globalist. There is no room for freedom. For choice. Implicitly those leading the COVID fight are globalists, and compliance is more important than effectiveness.

There is something called the Fermi Paradox. It is the mystery of why, if planets are so common, don’t we see any galactic colonizing civilizations? They should be crawling all over the place.

The Fermi Paradox - YouTube

Well they aren’t. Possibly because to surmount interstellar travel civilizations must first become global. But global civilizations no longer can value diversity and fail from choosing a single approach to every problem until they choose wrong. For an introduction see Where are all the aliens? (Kurzgesagt YouTube science channel).

The bottom line: Within 3 weeks of a teen becoming infected at a COVID party, I can no longer get it from them. And their immunity reduces transmission for everyone. As long as they haven’t had COVID, they are dangerous to me.

That state that had the COVID parties? They are done. Today is their peak. COVID will decline so fast there it will make your head swim: