Perpetual hypocrisy is one thing. Castigation and hypocrisy is quite another matter.

This is where we are at in the country of the United States. A major motion picture that has apparently been nominated for SIX Golden Globe awards called "Vice" is about Dick Cheney during the Presidential administration of George Dubya Bush. It's now 2018. Ten years later and the zeitgeist is willing to speak some truth about what happened.

Even while they white wash the more scatological and despotic parts, it's still amazing how we are getting major motion cinema events portraying a United States presidential administration as predatory, authoritarian assholes.

For what it's worth, the Grant and Reagan administrations still hold the record for criminal convictions, with Nixon nearby. Herr Trump is in competition for first place. Willing to allow the Russians help him take over the government seems to have upset all the patriotic americans who work in the various institutions. Thank. God.

When the primary goal is to make profits rather than serve the public, privatization fails. Some community goals cannot be quantified into costs and benefits. Is having a beach that is not polluted good? Of Course, but how do you quantify that with dollars?

Answer : you can't. So predatory firms manipulate the public dialogue and make people think that local and regional government inhibits economics, rather than (in historical reality) prevent the vultures from fucking up everything that is good and cool and awesome -- just so a few privileged people can make a few extra bucks.

Keeping it real y'all.

This is what I wrote in response to Mr. Quentin Kopp, who attempted to run for mayor in the early 1980's against Dianne Feinstein as an attempt to have Republicans invade San Francisco politics. Mr. Kopp likes to use disreputable sources to justify his bigoted mindset.

To the Editor:

I have a lot of respect for ex-mayor of San Franciscan Quentin Kopp. Except for one thing. Mr. Kopp mentioned in the latest December issue of the Richmond Review that “California possesses more than 4 million illegal aliens and the National Economics Editorial estimates that pay $3.5 billion in taxes, but cost California about $30 billion yearly.”

The same thing could be said of lower middle class natives. Currently most mid-western states get more in taxes than they actually pay in return. So why is Mr. Kopp focusing on “illegal aliens” ONLY? Most white middle class suburban Califonrians also pay less taxes than they actually gain in costs, AND by the same rate as the excoriated “illegal aliens” of which you speak. So why are we bringing up these specious statistics?

According to “mediabiasfactcheck.com“ — a reputable and renowned unbiased fact check organization — the National Economics Editorial is considered an extremely biased and questionable resource

From the LINK: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-economics-editorial/

National Economics Editorial (NEE) is a news site that purports to support Economic Nationalism. While NEE does cover some economic issues it is, as the name implies, mainly an editorial site. The opinions expressed in the stories cover current affairs with a pronounced right wing bias. NEE is, on the whole, long on rhetoric and short on factual content and credible sourcing. Due to the overt bias and lack of factual information, NEE is rated Questionable.

So why are we enabling this biased argument in the Richmond district community newspaper? Why are we getting opinions that are external to the neighborhood of the Richmond district from an obviously biased and bigoted source, purporting to be parochial and genuine to the interests of the community?

this is what the Editor of the Richmond Review (Paul Kozakiewicz) said in response

Hello. I don't understand your comparison of illegal aliens and middle class suburban white folks. Illegal aliens are in the country illegally, have bypassed those hard-working immigrants that are waiting in line to enter this country, and occasionally commit crimes against U.S. citizens, which would not have occured were they not in the country illegally. Should our country have open borders and allow anyone in the world in at any time? Are the costs to the American taxpayer in Kopp's column wrong? Am I missing something here?

This was my reply to this editor

I am not hear to argue with you and I respect your opinion. But your last name does not appear to be native american indian, which means you are an immigrant too.

I didn’t realize that the editor’s purpose is to criticize what was a letter in response to Mr. Kopp’s usage of a biased source of information. How about using a more reputable source like the Rand corporation or the center for immigration studies

https://cis.org/Report/Impact-Immigration-California

or how about The Harvard Business School

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/09-013_15702a45-fbc3-44d7-be52-477123ee58d0.pdf

I don’t know you personally, but I was born in San Francisco on 6th & Geary at the old French Hospital, and I think my views were expressed respectfully. There are a lot of costs, some of which are enabling corporate tax havens for large multinational corporations. You also make colorful presumptions about committing crimes against US citizens not supported by actual studies of immigrant populations which state that crime rates are actually less

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/30/upshot/crime-immigration-myth.html

That would be the New York Times BTW.

You have a right to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Or if I am wrong, give me some reputable source, and the National Economics Editorial is not a reputable source. Which I believe I proved.

So don’t side step the truth of my allegations with banter and rhetorical questions that are more opinion than fact sir.

Hopefully the editor of the Richmond Review will not exercise censorship. That would truly be disappointing.

Take care,

Gino Napoli.

I have as of yet received no response. Mr. Kozakiewicz has said nothing one way or the other.

This is how y'all have to deal with these people by the way, which is why I am posting this interaction. More than likely Mr. Paul K is pretty cool, but is ignorant in certain matters because he is being preyed upon by ideologues who are feeding him false information. All you have to do is point out where the reliable information is, say that you have respect, admit that you might be wrong (which is 100% truth) and wait. That is the only honest dialogue you can have.

Life goes on ...

I am going to try to be more active on my blog. The literal meaning of "blog" is Biographical Log.

In other words, saying something interesting, expressing something real, sharing experiences and real world circumstances.

So today, I get a "refund" from CalStrs -- California State Teacher Retirement System -- because apparently it took more money away then was legal. So I got $83. Wow. I would rather sock away $83 into a fund that will enable me to retire at age 59 for $4200 a month before taxes. But some bumpkin proletariat out there was manipulated into filing a law suit, under the delusional notion that he/she was being screwed out of his/her money, and the state system lost under the semantic letter of the law.

Meanwhile the goons are storming the legislature and city councils crying foul because having a large pension insurance fund doesn't help the folks on Wall Street make money. Oh, but apparently the Free Market applies to managing money, and large pension funds inhibit the creativity of Wall Street. Really now. You mean how to creatively screw people out of money by slicing up millions of mortgages into meaningless financial entities that got rated triple A because the ratings agencies were paid very well to pretend and overlook the entire fraudulent scheme that crashed when AIG could no longer insure against the fragility of the market.

Fuck these people. They only care about sinking their teeth into other peoples money and dish out this free market nonsense as camouflage. A large pension fund is absolutely better for everyone in the system. It is also the most efficient way to manage money -- because the costs are minimized and the vagaries of the irrational market are spread out and sunk into an aggregate fund. Individual accounts are subject to individual fees, along with the whims and/or inexperience of those who manage such individual accounts, and their is ample historical evidence that only the financiers benefit.

Yea of course, some people can gain more than others, but so many others lose, you have to wonder why change a system that benefits everyone into something that might (at the very extreme best case scenario) only benefit a few at the expense of the many?

Answer: because the donor class funds the corrupted politicians to screw the middle class and they make sure their corrupted view is available in the media jungle, preying and trouncing upon the weak and ignorant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwvjkJXaIJE

Dr. Ken Berry explains how he came to his current understanding as a progression from when he was in medical school. He wrote a book called "Lies my Doctor Told Me" that breaks down about 17 or so various myths that have no data or science backing the claims, and more usually have credible science absolutely refuting them.

I bought the book and read it. Dr. Berry gave links to sources at the end of every chapter.

Good quote at the 1:50 mark:

Your body is not like a car. The more you drive your body it doesn't wear out.... The human body, the joints, are constantly repairing and renewing. If you are feeding your body the correct diet and you are using your joints appropriately .... So do not believe the wear and tear myth ... the myth is pushed by doctors, especially doctors who get paid well by chopping out joints and putting in new artificial joints.

Interesting perspective. Given that artificial hip replacements are a modern phenomenon that is escalating, you have to wonder if this is in trend with the other escalating metabolic syndrome diseases (Heart Disease, Type 2 Diabetes, Cancer, Alzheimer's, Obesity, etc...).