Intriguing, But Probably Not

Here’s one explanation as to why the Socialists allowed President Braindead onto the debating stage last week:

It was the debate heard around the world, and it changed the U.S. presidential election overnight. While former President Donald Trump was already looking good in the polls, it was still a tight race, but then frail Joe Biden appeared on the CNN stage in Atlanta Thursday night and proved he is simply not up to the job of commander-in-chief.

But was his disastrous performance an accident? Or were devious insiders setting up the octogenarian to fail so they could replace him with someone a little sharper—say, perhaps California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer? 

Nah.

Now, if Biden were to be found dangling on a rope in the Oval Office in a “suicide” scenario — now that is more like the Socialists we all know and love.

…but that’s just replacement theory.  It’s not like FJB somehow got hold of Jeffrey Epstein’s client list, or anything.

And anyway, if the Democrats’ best replacement hopes are the respective Gauleiters of Michigan and Kalifornia, they may as well stick with Biden.

The REAL Big Loser?

Last week the Supreme Court dealt what seems to be a massive blow to the bureaucracy of the modern Administrative State — wherein an agency can become a de facto mini-state by creating and interpreting its own regulations, and then enforcing them without much in the way of legal oversight and defense.

The beacon in this ruling is SEC v. Jarkesy, which noted “…the Securities Exchange Commission’s power to serve as enforcer, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner in administrative proceedings for violating the securities laws. The Court found that the defendants are entitled to a jury trial before an Article III judge.”

Needless to say, the gun guys — especially these folks, from whom I excerpted and modified the previous paragraph — who have long suffered such iniquity at the hands of the loathsome Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF) agency, are all over this.

However, lost in all this excitement is the agency which I think has the most to lose from Jarkesy  (and the earlier Loper Bright v. Raimondo decision).

I refer here to the still-more loathsome Internal Revenue Service (IRS), who have always been able to bludgeon taxpayers in this manner.  They have their own regulations, their own courts and, lest we forget, a veritable army of well-armed minions who are only too willing to enforce their agency’s regulatory diktat.  I remember seeing on TV an excellent summary of the power of the IRS when a judge said, “So basically, in order to win your case against this man, all the IRS has to do is prove that they followed their own internal procedures properly?”  to which the IRS lawyer said, “Yes, your Honor.”

Massive rafts of tax law have given birth to an entire world of tax lawyers and -accountants (both in private practice and in the IRS itself), which is in itself excessive and burdensome.  (I am reminded of the way colonial Hong Kong collected income tax:  once a year the taxpayer took to the tax office his employer’s statement of his gross salary paid, and he would write out a cheque for 5% of that total to the government.  That’s it.  Imagine the impact of that scenario in the United States today.)

Anyway, I’m not only not a lawyer, but I also don’t play one on TV and I sure as hell don’t play one on this blog.  But I am generally cognizant of the bigger picture, and I’m just wondering if the greatest losers of the Lopez Bright  and Jarkesy  decisions will not be the horrible SEC, EPA and ATF, but the fouler-still IRS.

I am sure that the Powdered Wigs among my Readership will be only too pleased to set me straight.

Round One To The Good Guys

When Charles De Gaulle stated that it was impossible to govern a country which produced 246 types of cheese, he was really talking about politics.  So in a country where there are at a rough guess about five political parties per voter, national elections are two-rounders:  the first round eliminates most of the outliers, and the thing gets serious in the second round.

Even so, I was surprised at the first round results:  National Rally garnered a full third of the votes cast, with FrogPres “Granny-Shagger” Macron’s “globalist” party a distant third (after the Socialists).

Marine Le Pen‘s far-right* National Rally party led France’s snap parliamentary elections on Sunday with 33% of the vote, according to the interior ministry, with the leftist alliance New Popular Front following in second place at almost 28%. President Macron’s ruling coalition trailed in third place with 20%.

Of course, the Left accepted the election results stoically… nah, just kidding, they went all hair on fire and screaming riots, as is their wont when the people don’t vote the way they want them to.

The French people may have spoken at the ballot box, but the result clearly left some feeling very upset. Protests erupted in several French cities overnight, most particularly in Paris, where thousands gathered. The New Popular Front, which represents a spectrum of left wing parties from the pro-European Union centrists to full-blooded communists has earlier threatened they would “resist” the result if the RN won, and the protests may be the firs throes of that, although given there is a week to run until the second round of the election actually allocates the majority of the seats and decides whether Le Pen’s RN can command a majority in the house or not, perhaps expect more violence next week.

Comment of the week:  “Every dead cop means one less vote for Le Pen”, thus combining support for lawlessness with political terrorism in one pithy sentence.

On a parallel note:  the Greens got no votes at all (being part of the 3.1% “Other”, which encompasses over a dozen parties.

Roll on, Sunday.


*they aren’t, except by the standards of the Howling Left.

Just Like Guns, Eh Bill?

From Cloud-Cuckoo Land, where unicorns are a common sight:

Speaking in London this week, Bill Gates called AI a ‘wonderful’ technology that can save humans from climate change and disease.

But he warned that it needs to be used ‘by people with good intent’, as it could be used by criminals ‘engaged in cyber attacks or political interference’.

Yeah, for “A.I.” read guns — well, except that he’s a well-known gun control advocate (except when it comes to his security detail, probably).  And the parallel doesn’t end there:

Gates, one of the 10 richest humans in the world, said: ‘The defence has to be smarter than the offence.’

He may be one of the richest, but he sure as hell isn’t one of the smartest.  (Hell, he buys into the “climate change” bullshit — an infallible indicator of dumbassery right there.)

Stick to Windows, Bill.  Gawd knows it needs help.

As for defense:

Oh How Charming

From Dubai-on-Thames:

The tallest skyscraper in London that will rival the Shard is set to begin construction next week. 

Planning for 1 Undershaft began eight years ago but today City Corporation planning officers have finally recommended it for approval ahead of a committee meeting next Tuesday.

Towering at 74 floors, the architectural masterpiece would be built between other east London landmarks, the Cheesegrater and the Gherkin.

Apparently it’s not quite a done deal:

It will still need final sign off from Mayor Sadiq Khan and the next Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Secretary.

“Levelling Up”?  What kind of fucking title is that?

Never a radical Muslim asshole with a stolen airliner when you actually need one, is there?

Mighty Falling

Back when I were a young (!) data analyst and retail specialist at The Great Big Research Company, one of my minor clients was Walgreens Drug Stores.  (I say “minor” only because I was reporting only on the grocery section of the stores, and not the Rx or even the over-the-counter (OTC) drug or general merchandise products.)

Anyway, I became very friendly with one of the execs, and in one of our conversations she let slip that at that point in time, Walgreens had never — not ever in the history of the company — failed to make a quarterly dividend payment to shareholders.  I checked on that, and she was correct.  So a couple of years later, once I’d left Nielsen and was managing my own 401k account, I purchased a bunch of Walgreens shares and watched the dividend payments roll in, reinvesting them back into the business for several years.

Then one day I was driving to the local mall, and something stuck in my brain on the way there.  I couldn’t figure it out because that’s the nature of such things;  but on the way home I figured out what it was.

On the short five-mile trip between the mall and home, I had passed six Walgreens outlets.  And all my old retailer instincts came to the fore:  Walgreens was, in the industry parlance, over-stored.  Granted, this was in Greater Chicago (Chicagoland), where Walgreens’ head office was located, but still…

A short time later I sold all my WAG shares (at a very handsome profit).

Of course, all that was back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, but I note this recent development (as shared by Reader Mike L.) with interest:

Walgreens is set to close a substantial number of its roughly 8,600 locations across the United States as the company looks to reset the struggling pharmaceutical chain’s business.

CEO Tim Wentworth said on a call with analysts Thursday that “changes are imminent” for the roughly 25% of stores that aren’t profitable and Walgreens’ strategic review will “include the closure of a significant portion of these underperforming stores.”

“We are at a point where the current pharmacy model is not sustainable and the challenges in our operating environment require we approach the market differently,” he said.

Okay, fine,  This can and does happen to many a business.  But there’s a wrinkle:

Wentworth said the closures would focus on locations that aren’t profitable, too close to each other or stores struggling with theft.

The first two phenomena are common, while the third… well, let’s just say that unless I miss my guess (but I doubt that I do) a whole bunch of inner-city Walgreens outlets are going to be boarded up because of undocumented product movement.  And those areas are going to become not only “food” deserts, but “medication” deserts as well.  (The other kind of “medications” are firmly established there, of course.)

And by the way, Wentworth is a seriously smart cookie — unlike so many other corporate CEOs of recent vintage — so if he can’t get the existing show to work, it’s a safe bet that nobody in the industry can.